IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2010 / 3RD ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 26106 of 2009(G) PETITIONER: --------------- R.BABU D'CRUZ, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.CRUZ ROCKY, U.D.CLERK, GOVERNMENT SANSKRIT COLLEGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, RESIDING AT VIMALA BHAVAN, USHA NAGAR-36, MANGADU DESOM, MANGADU VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.NISHA BOSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C). NO. 26106 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 24th day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner, an Upper Division Clerk in the Government Sanskrit College, Thiruvananthapuram, had a grievance that though he was entitled to promotion, it was denied only on the ground that a criminal case was pending against him. The petitioner filed WP(C) No. 27302 of 2005, which was disposed of as per Ext.P15 judgment dated 22/08/2007. The operative portion of the judgment reads as follows: “In the above facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1 to consider and pass orders on Exhibit P14 strictly on its merit and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. Respondent No.1 shall ensure that petitioner is W.P.(C) NO.26106 OF 2009 :: 2 :: afforded sufficient opportunity to be heard before any decision is taken in the matter. The Detective Inspector, who is in charge of the crime referred to above, shall ensure that the final report is submitted, if not already done, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Petitioner shall produce a certified copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before respondent No.1 and the investigating officer for compliance.” 2. In the Writ Petition, the petitioner has stated that in spite of Exhibit P15 judgment, no action was taken by the respondents and therefore, the petitioner filed another representation dated 10/6/2009 ( Exhibit P16) to the Director of Collegiate Education, Thiruvananthapuram. 3. The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition are the following: i. To call for the records leading to Exhibit P10 and to quash the same by the issuance of a W.P.(C) NO.26106 OF 2009 :: 3 :: writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction. ii. To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction compelling and commanding the respondents to regularise the service of the petitioner during the periods of suspension and consider and pass orders on Exhibit P16; iii.To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction compelling and commanding the respondent to give promotions to the petitioner to the post of Head Accountant with effect from the date of promotion of his immediate junior, give promotion to the post of Junior Administrative Officer with effect from the date of promotion of his immediate junior and Senior Administrative Officer with effect from the date of promotion of his immediate junior based on the seniority list of UD clerk. iv.To grant such other reliefs this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner limits his prayer for a direction to the second respondent to dispose of Exhibit P16 representation. W.P.(C) NO.26106 OF 2009 :: 4 :: 5. The learned Government Pleader, on written instructions, submitted that pursuant to Exhibit P15 judgment, the Government considered the request of the petitioner and issued an order G.O(Rt) 358/2008/H.Edn. dated 29/2/2008. It was held therein that the claim of promotion and other service benefits shall be considered only after the disposal of the criminal case pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram and after a decision is taken on the regularisation of the period of suspension by the Director of Collegiate Education. 6. The petitioner has not challenged the Government order dated 29/2/2008. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the said order was not communicated to him. The learned Government pleader submitted that a copy of the order will be communicated to him within a period of two weeks. The submission made by the learned Government W.P.(C) NO.26106 OF 2009 :: 5 :: Pleader is recorded. Reserving the right of the petitioner to challenge the order passed by the Government or to take appropriate steps in the matter, the Writ petition is closed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/