IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 10TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 19TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 31967 of 2009(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- G.KRISHNAN, SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE (RETD.) GANAPATHY SADANAM, VADAKKANCHERRY PALAKKAD. BY ADV. MR. S.EASWARAN MR. P.MURALEEDHARAN (IRIMPANAM) RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTD BY THE SECRETARY HOME(H) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE WAYANAD. 3. THE ASISTANT COMMANDANT OF POLICE (AR) WAYANAD. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. P.NANDA KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: kkms/ ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.31967 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 10th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner retired from service as Sub Inspector of Police on 30/09/2008. He is aggrieved by Ext.P5 order dated 27/07/2009. 2. Facts of the case are that while the petitioner was working as Sub Inspector of Police at Vythiri Police Station, on the eve of his retirement, he was issued Ext.P1 memo of charges, and he submitted Ext.P2 explanation. Subsequently, he was issued Ext.P3 show cause notice proposing action under Rule 59(b) of Part- III KSR. He submitted Ext.P4 explanation. Finally he was issued Ext.P5 order proposing to withhold Rs.200/- per month from his pension for a period of 5 years, under Rule 59(b) of Part III KSR. It is challenging this order, this writ petition is filed. 3. However, I notice that in view of Note 1 to Rule 59 of Part III KSR, the Government have the power to review their orders, if the affected employee makes an application to that effect within a WP(C) No.31967/2009 -2- period of three months from the date of the order. Therefore, the petitioner has an alternate remedy before the Government itself, and it is up to him to pursue the same. In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to seek review of Ext.P5 order. It is submitted that if the petitioner files an application seeking review as above within two weeks from today, the same shall be entertained by the 1st respondent as it is filed within the permitted time, and shall be dealt with on merits. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months of receipt of such application. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg