IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 3RD JULY 2008 / 12TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 16076 of 2008(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ SREE VAIRAMCODE DEVASWOM, THIRUNAVAYA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN BOARD OF TRUSTEES, SATHEESH KUMAR. BY ADV. SRI.MOHAN C.MENON RESPONDENTS: ------------- THE COMMISSIONER,HR & CE (ADMN.) DEPARTMENT, KOZHIKODE. BY G.P. SHRI R. LAKSHMINARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMAN & T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W.P.(C).No.16076/2008-L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Dated this the 3rd day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T RAMAN, J. The complaint of the petitioner is that inspite of the directions contained in Ext.P1 till now nothing is done in the matter. Ext.P1 is G.O.(Rt).No.4178/2003/RD, dated 29/12/2003, which was a final order passed in the revision petition filed by an employee against disciplinary action, wherein the disciplinary action was held untenable and set aside, and it was also found that huge amount was spent towards legal expenditure and the Government in the said order has directed the Commissioner to verify whether amount has been spent after obtaining sufficient approval and to take necessary action. Even examination of the matter by the Commissioner pursuant to the order has not been done. It is in these circumstances, this writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus and appropriate direction to the Commissioner to proceed in accordance with law pursuant to Ext.P1. 2. Heard. Learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. 3. It is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that the Vigilance case is pending against the concerned officer which resulted in delay in pursuing the matter. It is assured that needful W.P.(C).No. 16076 of 2008-L -: 2 :- shall be done as expeditiously as possible in this regard. Same is recorded. Accordingly, we direct the Commissioner to look into the matter as directed in Ext.P1 without delay. Since we have not examined the feasibility of fastening any liability as such on the officer as it is for the Commissioner to consider the factual situation and pass orders, we are not issuing notice to the officer and we make it clear that it is for the Commissioner to examine the matter independently. Writ petition is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMAN, Judge T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, Judge ms