IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 18TH MARCH 2010 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 8142 of 2010(P) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SRI.N.RAVICHANDRAN, S/O. NARAYANAN, AGED 42 YEARS, CLASS IV, SUB TREASURY, KOLLANGODE, RESIDING AT PUTTANIPURA HOUSE, MARUTHAPARA, VANDITHAVALAM, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SMT.R.RANJINI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. DISTRICT TREASURY OFFICER, PALAKKAD. 2. SUB TREASURY OFFICER, KOLLENGODE. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF TREASURIES, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF TREASURIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. MUHAMMED FAZAL. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 8142 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a Class IV employee in the Kollamgode Sub Treasury. He was placed under suspension as per Ext.P1 order dated 6.11.2008 in connection with misappropriation of an amount of Rs.4,80,000/- from Imperial Spirit Ltd. Company. One Arunachalam was arrested in connection with the said case and according to the said Arunachalam, the petitioner was his accomplice. It was based on the confession made by Arunachalam that the petitioner was implicated as the second accused in Crime No.290 of 2003 as a result of which he was suspended from service. Aggrieved by Ext.P1 order of suspension, the petitioner submitted Ext.P2 representation before the third respondent. The specific case of the petitioner is that though the order of suspension was passed as early as on 6.11.2008, so far he has not been served with the memo of charges. In the circumstances, the petitioner prays that Ext.P1 order may be quashed and he may be directed to be reinstated in service. W.P.(C) NO. 8142/2010 2 2. Ext.P1 order of suspension was passed on 6.11.2008. The petitioner submitted Ext.P2 representation dated 22.5.2009 before the third respondent with a request to review Ext.P1 order of suspension. Since Ext.P1 was submitted before the third respondent, the same can be construed only as an appeal under Rule 22 of the Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1960. However, no orders have been passed on Ext.P2 so far. Para 17 of the Manual for Disciplinary Proceedings also assumes relevance in this context. It provides that the suspension order, in the case of Government servants who are continuing in suspension pending completion of the disciplinary proceedings initiated against them for a period of six months, should be reviewed. In this case, even after the lapse of more than one year, the disciplinary proceedings are yet to be initiated. In the circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the third respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2 as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of three weeks from today. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) sp/ W.P.(C) NO. 8142/2010 3 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. W.P.(C) NO. 8142/2010 JUDGMENT 18th March, 2010