IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 18TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 22617 of 2009(V) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- K.K.KISHORE, S/O.MADIKKAI KUNHIKANNAN, AGED 49 YEARS, DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER FOR SCHEDULED CASTS, DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICE, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. MR.KODOTH SREEDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPLE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF SCHEDULED CAST & SCHEDULED TRIBE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.P.NANDAKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/09/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.22617/2009 V APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE REPORT OF TRANSFER OF CHARGE DTD. 19/01/2009 TO THE PETITIONER. P2: COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER ON 5/02/2009. P3: COPY OF THE ORDER OF SUSPENSION DTD. 12/03/2009 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. P4: COPY OF THE REQUEST DTD. 24/04/2009 BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT. P5: COPY OF THE CHARGE MEMO TO THE PETITIONER BY THE RESPONDENT. P6: COPY OF THE REPLY DTD. 1/06/2009 BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT. P7: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 25/07/2009 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE R1(A): COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.D5-8479/08 DTD. 3/2/09. ANNEXURE R1(B): COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE REVIEW MEETING HELD ON 12/03/09. /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss V.GIRI, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = W.P.(C). No. 22617 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = = Dated this the 9th day of September 2009. JUDGMENT Petitioner joined service as Grade-II Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe Development Officer and was promoted to Grade-I. He was entrusted with the task of identifying the beneficiaries for the housing scheme among scheduled castes. It seems that it is alleged that the petitioner did not reach the target which was assigned to him and it was further seems that at a review meeting, when he was questioned regarding the inadequacy, he did not answer in a proper manner. He was placed under suspension under Ext.P3 order dated 12.03.2009. He sought for revocation of the suspension which was directed to be considered by this Court. His request has been rejected under Ext.P7 order which is challenged in the present writ petition. 2. A statement has been filed on behalf of the respondents. It is essentially contended that the petitioner has been inadequate in his performance. The target assigned to him was not achieved and he also did not act properly when question were put to him in a meeting chaired by the Minister. W.P.(C). No. 22617 OF 2009 2 3. I heard learned Counsel for the petitioner Mr. Kodoth Sreedharan and learned Government Pleader Mr. P.NandaKumar. 4. Petitioner is under suspension for the past six months. The charges do not comprehend any action of misappropriation or some such serious aspects. No doubt according to the respondents, petitioner has not been efficient in the discharge of his duties. The question whether the same would amount to misconduct need not be decided at this stage. As disciplinary proceedings are already under way, it is open to the department to continue the same. 5. I take note of the fact that this Court had on an earlier occasion directed the Government to consider the question of revocation of suspension, with regard to the non acceptability of the charges raised. Enquiry into the charges currently levelled against the petitioner really may not require the petitioner to be kept away from the office further. Suspension also cannot be substitute for a punishment. 6. In these circumstances, I am of the view that the petitioner's suspension may be revoked. The respondent shall W.P.(C). No. 22617 OF 2009 3 pass an order in this regard within 3 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is open to the Government to post the petitioner in any other station. The disciplinary action pending against the petitioner shall continue and shall be completed within 6 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. (V.GIRI) JUDGE kkms/