IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2009 / 17TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 15291 of 2009(F) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- N.J. MATHEW, AGED 56, S/O. JOSEPH, RESIDING AT KIZHAKE CHENDAU HOUSE, WEST CHENNANKARY P.O., KAINAKARY VILLAGE, KUTTANAD TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 688 501. (FORMER BOAT MASTER, KERALA STATE WATER TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT) BY ADVS. MR.MANJU ANTONEY, MR.K.JAYAKUMAR(CHERTHALA), MR.BABY PAUL (CHEMBAKASSERIL), SMT.LAYA FRANCIS. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE WATER TRANSPORT DIRECTORATE, ALAPPUZHA. 3. UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, VIGILANCE (A) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. JOINT SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, VIGILANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. ADDL. CHIEF SECRETARY, HOME & VIGILANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P.(C) No. 15291 of 2009 F =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 8th day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT Heard Smt. Manju Antoney, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. Anu Sivaraman, the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner was a former employee of the Kerala State Water Transport department. While in service, disciplinary action was initiated against him on the allegation that he demanded and accepted illegal gratification. An enquiry into the charges levelled against the petitioner was conducted by the Vigilance Tribunal. Based on the report of the Tribunal, the Government issued Ext.P1 order dated 16-3-1993 compulsorily retiring him from service with effect from the date on which he was placed under suspension i. e., 18-2-1991. The petitioner challenged Ext.P1 by filing O.P. No. 8094 of 1993 in this Court. The said original petition was dismissed by Ext.P2 judgment wherein it was held that there is no scope for interfering W.P.(C) No. 15291/09 2 with Ext.P1. The petitioner carried the matter in appeal. By Ext.P3 judgment delivered on 13-11-2002 the writ appeal was dismissed. The petitioner thereafter moved the President of India through the Chief Secretary to Government of Kerala by filing a representation dated 15-2- 2006. The said representation was forwarded to the Government of Kerala for disposal. On that representation the petitioner was heard by the Secretary to Government, Vigilance department on 27-12-2007. This writ petition is filed contending that though the petitioner was heard on 27-12-2007, till date orders have not been passed on his representation or communicated to him. However, relying on Ext.P6 extract from the files, wherein the Hon'ble Minister had ordered that the review petition be rejected, it is contended that the order rejecting the review petition is a cryptic order. 3. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, on instructions, submits that pursuant to the hearing held on 27-12-2007, the Government had issued G.O.(Ms) No.28/2008/Vig. dated 16-8-2008 rejecting the representation dated 15-2-2006 submitted by the petitioner and that a copy thereof was also communicated to the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner disputes the said statement and submits that the petitioner has not so far been served with a copy of the order passed by the Government on 16-8-2008. He submits that the Government may be W.P.(C) No. 15291/09 3 directed to serve a copy of the order dated 16-8-2008 on the petitioner and that the petitioner may be granted an opportunity to amend the writ petition by incorporating a prayer to challenge the said order. 4. In my opinion, in the light of Exts.P2 and P3 judgments of this Court, the challenge to the order passed by the Government on 16-8-2008 rejecting the petitioner's representation must fail. The petitioner unsuccessfully challenged the order compulsorily retiring him from service in this Court. The original petition filed by him was dismissed by Ext.P2 judgment delivered on 22-12-2000. The petitioner carried the matter in appeal and the Division Bench of this Court concurred with the learned single Judge and dismissed the appeal by Ext.P3 judgment. Nearly three years thereafter, the petitioner moved the President of India by submitting a representation. That representation was forwarded to the Government of Kerala and after the petitioner was heard, the Government rejected the same. In my opinion, in the light of Exts.P2 and P3 judgments of this Court, Ext.P1 order compulsorily retiring the petitioner has attained finality. The Government could not have thereafter reviewed it as prayed for by the petitioner. Since Exts.P1 and P2 judgments have attained finality, the petitioner was not in my opinion entitled to seek any relief at the hands of the Government. Further the representation submitted by him was also W.P.(C) No. 15291/09 4 highly belated. For these reasons I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief in this writ petition. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. mn.