IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 10TH MARCH 2011 / 19TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 31583 of 2010(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- E.KUNHIMAYIN, AGED 51 YEARS, JOINT BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, CHAVAKKAD (UNDER SUSPENSION), RESIDING AT ELAYADATH HOUSE, KAITHAKKAL, CHERUKATTOOR AMSOM, PANAMARAM, MANANTHAVADI TALUK, WAYANAD. BY ADV. SRI.K.D.BABU SRI.K.N.PADMAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. COMMISSIONER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT, RURAL DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONERATE, L.M.S.COMPOUND, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, (RURAL DEVELOPMENT) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.ANTONY MUKKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 31583 of 2010 ================== Dated this the 10th day of March, 2011 J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs: “i. issue a writ of certiorari or any to her appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Ext.P4 Show Cause Memo. ii. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents not to pass any order imposing penalty on the petitioner without following the procedure prescribed in Rule 15 of the Kerala Civil Service (C.C. & A) Rules, 1960. iii. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 1st respondent to complete the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner within a time limit fixed by this Honourable Court. iv. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2 review petition within a time limit fixed by this Honourable Court. 2. On 9.11.2010, I passed the following order in this writ petition; 'In this writ petition, the grievance of the petitioner is primarily against Ext. P4 show cause notice, wherein he has been directed to show cause why he should not be removed from service invoking Rule 18(ii) of the Kerala Civil Service (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules. I directed the learned Government Pleader to take instructions as to how without stating any reasons as contemplated under Rule 18 (ii) that rule can be invoked for imposing a major penalty on a Government servant without conducting an enquiry. On 2.11.2010, on the basis of the submission made by the learned Government Pleader, I passed the following order: “The learned Government Pleader submits that the respondents were forced to complete proceedings as per Ext. P4 only because the petitioner evaded accepting the charge memo. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is receiving subsistence allowance every month and therefore the same cannot be correct. I am not inclined to go into this controversy. The 2 petitioner shall appear before this Court on 9.11.2010. On that day, the learned Government Pleader shall bring the charge memo to the Court. The petitioner shall accept the charge memo and acknowledge the same so that further proceedings can be taken on the basis of the charge memo expeditiously. Post on 9.11.2010.” The same is self-explanatory. 2. Today, the petitioner is present. He admits having received the charge memo. The learned Government Pleader submits that the respondents are prepared to complete the proceedings after conducting an enquiry. In the above circumstances, the 1st respondent is directed to conduct an enquiry into the allegations in Ext. R1(a) memo of charges and complete the disciplinary proceedings after complying with the Rules, within four months. The petitioner shall co- operate with the enquiry proceedings and receive all notices regarding enquiry promptly, be present before the enquiry officer on all posting days and shall not request for any adjournments without good reason. Post after four months.' 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that enquiry is now complete and, therefore, the writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the respondents to see that final orders pursuant to the enquiry are passed within a time frame. 4. Having heard the learned Government Pleader also, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the respondents to see that the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner are taken to its logical conclusion, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge 3