IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2010 / 26TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 18643 of 2010(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- DR.M.GANGADHARAN NAIR, DEPUTY DIRECTOR (AH), SPECIAL LIVESTOCK BREEDING PROGRAMME, AYYANTHOLE P.O., THRISSUR-680 003. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, AGRICULTURE (AH) DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-795 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTORATE OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033. BY G.P.SRI.ARAVIND KUMAR BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.18643 of 2010 (E) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 16th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is working as a Chief Veterinary Officer. In contemplation of disciplinary proceedings, he was placed under suspension. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated and have been concluded with imposition of warning. His period of suspension was regularised as duty without pay and allowances. Requests made for pay and allowances were rejected by Exts.P5 & P7 on the ground that his case is not covered by Rule 56 B(3) of Part-I, KSR. It is challenging this order, the writ petition has been filed. Rule 56B(3) provides that where an authority competent to order reinstatement is of the opinion that the suspension was wholly unjustified, the Officer shall be paid full pay and allowances, to which he would have been entitled, had he not been suspended. In this case, disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner is concluded with the imposition of a punishment of warning. Therefore, the view taken in Exts.P5 & P7 is that, in the WP(C) No.18643/2010 -2- circumstances, the suspension cannot be considered to be wholly unjustified enabling the petitioner for pay and allowances for the period he was kept under suspension. Therefore, I see nothing erroneous in the view expressed in Exts.P5 & P7. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg