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. 18877 of 2009(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- RADHAKRISHNA PILLAI P.D. INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.K.SASIKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT HOME DEPARTMENT,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. DIRECTOR, VIGILANCE ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU PATHANAMTHITTA. GOVERNMENT PLEADER ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/09/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).18877/2009 -------------------- Dated this the 9th day of September, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner entered service as Sub Inspector Trainee on 20.4.1995 pursuant to an advice by the Public Service Commission. He was promoted as Circle Inspector of Police. While he was serving as Circle Inspector of Police in the Thiruvananthapuram Range, an allegation arose as regards police atrocities at Killi. The Kerala State Human Rights Commission investigated and drew up a report. There was a recommendation to place seven police officers under suspension. This included the petitioner. Petitioner was placed under suspension but later by Ext.P3, he was reinstated. He is now working as Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau, Pathanamthitta. Petitioner's grievance arose from the fact that his probation in the post of Circle Inspector of Police has not been declared so far. Hence the writ petition. 2. A statement has been filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent. Paragraph 4 of the same reads as follows:- W.P.(C).18877/2009 2 “Even though the petitioner was reinstated into service and completed five years of service, the suspension period has not been regularized. This is due to the non disposal of the Joint Oral Enquiry ordered against him. The Memo of charges has been sent to Government for approval. Increment in the cadre of Circle Inspector of Police will not be denied if he is exonerated from the charges and period of suspension is ordered to be treated as duty. One vacancy has already been reserved for him to sanction Higher Grade.” 3. Ext.R2(a) request made by the Director General of Police for an approval of the memo of charges as prepared by the Enquiry Officer was submitted on 26.2.2008. But the Government has not taken a decision so far. I do not think this is justified. 4. Accordingly, 1st respondent, Government is directed to take a decision on the proposal for framing charges as W.P.(C).18877/2009 3 against the petitioner, pursuant to Ext.R2(a) within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If the Government does not grant approval for the proposal made by the DGP as contained in Ext.R2(a) or does not pass any orders within the aforementioned time frame, then the petitioner's probation in the post of Circle Inspector of Police shall be declared and orders in this regard shall be passed by the Head of the Department without any delay. Writ petition is disposed of as above. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs