IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 7TH JANUARY 2008 / 17TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 36341 of 2007(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ K.RADHAKRISHNA PILLAI, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O.KUNJAPPAN PILLAI, VLAKKOTTU HOUSE, KOTTAKAKAM, CHAVARA POST, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.J.JAYAKUMAR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ADDL. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, SOUTH ZONE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BEJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).36341/2007 -------------------- Dated this the 7th day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner challenges Ext.P8 order passed by the Additional Director General of Police ordering an oral enquiry aainst the petitioner for the alleged charge of dereliction of official duty. Petitioner contends that on an earlier occasion, Ext.P3 order passed by the Additional D.G.P was set aside by the Director General of Police in Ext.P5 requiring the disciplinary authority to issue an appropriate show cause notice along with the copy of the P.R.Minutes. Subsequently Ext.P6 order was passed by the Inspector General of Police, again imposing a punishment of bar of increment for three years without cumulative effect. This was challenged by the petitioner before the D.G.P which led to Ext.P7 order directing an oral enquiry to be conducted and it is pursuant to that, Ext.P8 has been issued. 2. Petitioner cannot be considered as aggrieved by Ext.P8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that W.P.(C).36341/2007 2 the proceedings, which were initiated against him as early as in 2003, have not been finalized so far. There is substance in this contention. 3. Having heard the learned Government Pleader also, the writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to complete the enquiry pursuant to Ext.P8 without further delay, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Other contentions of the petitioner are left open. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs