IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 13TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 22ND KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 28544 of 2008(W) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- G.DANIEL, DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER-III (IN-CHARGE)(NOW UNDER SUSPENSION) KOLLAM DISTRICT CO. OP.BANK LTD. H.O.KOLLAM, RESDING AT `DAHLIA', AMPALATHUMKALA P.O., EZHUKONE-691505. BY ADV. SRI.P.SANKARANKUTTY NAIR, ADV. SRI.T.V.AJAYAKUMAR. RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. PRESIDENT KOLLAM DISTRICT CO.OP.BANK LTD., KOLLAM. 2. GENERAL MANAGER, KOLLAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, KOLLAM. 3. REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR. R1 BY ADV. SRI.B.VINOD,SC,KOLLAM DIST.CO.OP.BANK. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/11/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J. ================================== W.P.(C)No.28544 of 2008 ================================== Dated this the 13th day of November, 2008. JUDGMENT While working as Deputy General Manager in the service of the bank of which the first respondent is the President, the petitioner was placed under suspension by the Part Time Administrator, on certain grounds of indiscipline. Ext.P2 judgment was issued on 18-3-2008 directing payment of subsistence allowance and to complete disciplinary proceedings within six months. Even at that time the enquiry had not commenced by examination of parties etc. All that was happening was that there were repeated changes of the enquiry officer and the presiding officer. It appears that matters got dragged on even thereafter and this writ petition is filed on 24-9-2008 seeking to quash the order of suspension issued on 30-8-2007. Whatever be the quality or gravity of the charges, there has to be WPC28544/08 -:2:- a finality. Guilt is not a matter of presumption or assumption. The delinquent is entitled to an opportunity of hearing. 2. The suspension order having been issued on 30-8-2007, he could not have been continued under suspension except under orders of the Registrar. Though such an order was issued by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, that had also worked itself out by the time the petitioner filed this writ petition. 3. The disciplinary proceedings and the quantum of work involved in that, was noticed by me while issuing the order dated 20-10-2008 on I.A.No.12538 of 2008 directing that disciplinary proceedings shall be completed by 12-12-2008. 4. The Registrar of Co-operative Societies has thereafter granted permission to the bank to WPC28544/08 -:3:- continue the petitioner under further suspension. The bank has accordingly issued further orders extending the suspension and he is still continuing under suspension. 5. The payment of subsistence allowance is a concept that has evolved having regard to the various social security measures, including the right to live and livelihood. Deprivation of such allowance is not permissible under the Indian Constitution. Rule 198(6) of the Kerala Subsistence Allowance Act applies to this case. If a person is placed under suspension continuously for a period more than one year, the rate of subsistence allowance will be 100% of the salary. It is hence directed that while the disciplinary proceedings shall be concluded on or before 31-12- 2008, the petitioner shall be paid subsistence allowance at the rate of 100% of his last drawn salary. Such payment will be from 1-9-2008. It is WPC28544/08 -:4:- so directed. Hence, this writ petition is ordered as aforesaid, leaving open all other contentions of the parties on the merits of the disciplinary proceedings. Since the petitioner is due to retire on 31-5-2009, the disciplinary proceedings shall be positively concluded within the aforesaid time limit. Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, Judge. sl.