IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 7TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 16TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 32915 of 2008(R) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- J.RADHAKRISHNA VADHYAR, A.S.M(TERMINATED KERALA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LTD, CHENGANNUR, RESIDING AT VADHYAR MADOM, PULLAD(P0), THIRUVALLA. BY ADV. SRI.MVS.NAMBOOTHIRY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA-REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE KERALA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LTD, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, MAVELI BHAVAN, GANDHI NAGAR, KOCHI-682020. 3. THE REGINAL MANAGER, THE KERALA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LTD, MAVELI BHAVAN, GANDHI NAGAR, KOCHI-682020. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 32915 of 2008 ------------------------------- Dated this the 7th November, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner, an employee of the Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd., was prosecuted for the offence punishable under Section 409 of Indian Penal Code, convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/=, by Ext.P2 judgment dated 30.4.2005 passed by the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pathanamthitta. The appeal filed by the petitioner therefrom was dismissed by the Court of Session, Pathanamthitta. The petitioner has challenged the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Magistrate and upheld by the appellate court in Crl.R.P.No.676 of 2007 on the file of this Court. After the dismissal of the appeal by the Court of Session, Pathanamthitta, the Regional Manager, Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd., the competent authority, dismissed the petitioner from service in terms of Rule 16(iii) of W.P.(C) No.32915/2008 2 KSCSC Helpers Service Rules, 1978. After Ext.P7 order dismissing the petitioner from service was passed, by Ext.P8 order passed on 29.8.2008, the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Magistrate was suspended by this Court. The petitioner submits that in view of Ext.P8 order passed by this Court, he has filed Ext.P9 representation before the Managing Director of the Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd., seeking reinstatement in service and also continuance in service subject to the decision of this Court in Crl.R.P.No.676 of 2007. In this writ petition, the petitioner challenges Ext.P7 order and prays for a direction to the respondents to reinstate him in service. 2. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was convicted by the trial Magistrate by Ext.P2 judgment and that the judgment of conviction and sentence was upheld in appeal. It is also not in dispute that Ext.P7 order was passed on 12.8.2008 while the judgment of conviction was in operation. As per the terms of Rule 16(iii) of Kerala State Civil Supplies W.P.(C) No.32915/2008 3 Corporation Helpers Service Rules, 1978, the Regional Manager was, therefore, justified in dismissing the petitioner from service. What the petitioner now claims is that after he was dismissed from service, the judgment of conviction and sentence has been suspended by this Court and therefore, he is entitled to reinstatement in service. In my opinion, there is no merit in the said contention. Rule 68 of Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation Service Rules, 1974, states that an employee who is dismissed from service following conviction on a criminal charge can be reinstated in service only if the judgment of conviction is set aside and he is acquitted of the charges. In the light of the said provision, the petitioner cannot claim reinstatement in service. The petitioner was dismissed from service while the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Magistrate was in operation. It is only after he was dismissed from service that Ext.P8 order was passed suspending the conviction of the petitioner. W.P.(C) No.32915/2008 4 Such being the situation, the reliefs prayed for by the petitioner cannot be granted. The Writ Petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. It is clarified that the dismissal of the Writ Petition will not stand in the way of the petitioner working out his remedies, if he is acquitted in Crl.R.P.No.676 of 2007 pending before this Court. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE nj.