IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 17TH JUNE 2010 / 27TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 4472 of 2010(H) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- S.VIJAYAKUMARAN PILLAI (UNDER SUSPENSION), SECRETARY, VIZHINJAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN, SRI.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR, SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD, SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM), SRI.MATHEW SUNNY. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT (EPB) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATS, DIRECTORATE OF PANCHAYATS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. DR.P.CHANDRASENAN, CRYSTAL, T.C.49/1123, MANACAUD.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. ANTONY MUKKATH, R3 BY ADVS. SRI.RAM MOHAN.G, SRI.G.P.SHINOD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/06/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.4472/2010-H: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL FILED BY THE R.3. DTD. 05/11/1999. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS DTD. 22/07/2005 IN APPEAL NO. 219/2005. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE VIZHINJAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT DTD. 12/01/2006. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS DTD. 15/03/2006 IN REVISION PETITION NO.4/2006. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE OMBUDSMAN FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS DTD. 23/06/2009 IN I.A. NO. 27/09 IN COMPALINT NO. 515/2009. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. A5-2315/09 DTD. 10/07/2009 PASSED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE ORDER G.O.(RT).NO.340/2010/LSGD DTD. 29/01/2010. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.4472 OF 2010 (H) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner retired from the service as Secretary of Vizhinjam Grama Panchayat on 31.3.2010. According to the petitioner, he joined the Vizhinjam Grama Panchayat only on 29.8.2008. 2. It is stated that long before joining the Panchayat on 15.3.2006, the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions had passed Ext.P2 order regarding the fixation of building tax in respect of a building constructed by the 3rd respondent. The order was to be complied within 2 months. The then Secretary did not comply with the said order and while so he was transferred from the Panchayat. 3. After the the petitioner assumed charge, an application made by the 3rd respondent before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions resulting in Ext.P5 order dated 23.6.2009. By this order, the petitioner who had in the meanwhile assumed charge as the Secretary of the Panchayat, was directed to comply with Ext.P2 order on or before 25.7.2009. It is stated that only when Ext.P5 proceedings were initiated was the WPC.No.4472 /2010 :2 : petitioner appraised of Ext.P2 order and that in compliance with Ext.P5 order, he passed Ext.P6 order on 10.7.2009. 4. Although the 3rd respondent was aggrieved by Ext.P6 order he was prosecuting the remedies against the said order. Be that as it may, it would appear that subsequently by Ext.P7 order dated 29.1.2010, on the allegation that the petitioner did not comply with Ext.P2 order, he was placed under suspension. It is challenging Ext.P7 order the writ petition is filed. Pursuant to the interim order passed by this court on 11.2.2010, petitioner was reinstated in service and on attaining the age of superannuation he retired from service on 31.3.2010. 5. In this writ petition what arises for consideration is whether Ext.P7 order placing the petitioner under suspension was justified or not. As already seen Ext.P2 order was passed by the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions on an appeal filed by the 3rd respondent. It is long after the expiry of the period specified for compliance there of that the petitioner assumed charge as Secretary on 29.8.2008. There is nothing on record to indicate that after assuming charge, petitioner willfully refused to pass orders implementing the directions of the Tribunal. On the WPC.No.4472 /2010 :3 : other hand, according to the petitioner, he was appraised of the order only when Ext.P5 memo was issued. It is also his case that in compliance with Ext.P5 order petitioner passed Ext.P6 order on 10.7.2009. It is thereafter that he was placed under suspension by Ext.P7. 6. In my view, on the aforesaid facts, Ext.P7 order placing the petitioner under suspension was unjustified. This is all the more so, since on the available facts, there is nothing to indicate that there was any willful default on the part of the petitioner. Consequently, Ext.P7 placing the petitioner under suspension will stand set aside. It is for the petitioner to seek disbursement of the terminal benefits before the respondents. Writ petition is allowed as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WPC.No.4472 /2010 :4 :