IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2008 / 3RD ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 16634 of 2008(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------------- PRASAD.P.C , PARANGAMMOOTTI HOUSE THOTTAMAN, RANNY, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEW RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. K.S.R.T.C REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ASST.TRANSPORT OFFICER, KSRTC, PATHANAMTHITTA. 3. CHIEF LAW OFFICER IN CHARGE OF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (VIGILANCE) KSRTC, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. HARIKRISHANAN.R., (FORMER DEPOT ENGINEER, PATHANAMTHITTA) NOW WORKING AS ASSISTANT WORK MANAGER, PAPPANAMCODE CENTRAL WORKSHOP, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. K.T. PUNNOOSE, (RTD VEHICLE SUPERVISOR,PATHANAMTHITTA DEPOT) NOW RESIDING AT KALLIKKATTIL HOUSE KARIVALAM PO, RANNY, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY SC SRI. JOHNSON P. JOHN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WP.(C) No.16634 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 24th day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT Prayers in the writ petition are as follows: “(i) Issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Exts.P1 and P2. (ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding respondents to treat the period of suspension of petitioner as his duty period and to grant full salary and other benefits for the period of suspension.” 2. Ext.P1 is the order dated 20.3.2007, by which the petitioner was placed under suspension. Ext.P2 is the memo of charges against the petitioner. Learned Standing Counsel on instructions submits that the petitioner was infact reinstated and posted at Kottarakkara, wherein he was placed under suspension yet another time in connection with another charge. Therefore, there is no question of this court interfering with Ext.P1. As far as Ext.P2 is concerned, it is a memo of charges. I do not think that it is for this court to interfere with the same. 3. As far as the second prayer is concerned, namely to treat the period of suspension of the petitioner as his duty period and to grant full salary and other benefits, that is an exercise to be undertaken upon the WPC. 16634/2008. 2 conclusion of the inquiry. The inquiry pursuant to Ext.P2 is not yet culminated. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the inquiry pursuant to Ext.P2 will be completed within two months. In such circumstances, while declining to interfere with Exts.P1 and P2 and also declining the prayer to treat the period of suspension as duty for the reason that the inquiry is not yet over, there will be a direction to the first respondent to see that the inquiry pursuant to Ext.P2 will be completed within a period of two months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment before the first respondent. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE) sb