IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 11TH DECEMBER 2008 / 20TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 36440 of 2008(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.K.RADHAKRISHNAN NAMBOOTHIRI, SUB GROUP OFFICER, ELEVUMTHITTA SUB GROUP, ARANMULA SUB GROUP, RESIDING AT MELEMADOM, MULAKUZHA.P.O. BY ADV. SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, NANDANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. COMMISSIONER OF DEVASWOM, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANDANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. ASSISTANT DEVASWOM, COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD,KOTTARAKKARA. 4. VIGILANCE OFFICER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANDAN CODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. JOYTHISHKUMAR, MEMBER, TEMLPE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, VELINELLOOR SREE RAMA SWAMY TEMPLE, VELINELLOOR, KOTTARAKKARA. BY SRI.K.N.VENUGOPALA PANICKER, SC FOR TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.36440 of 2008 ------------------------------- Dated this the 11th December, 2008. J U D G M E N T Heard Sri.S.Krishnamoorthy, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.K.N.Venugopala Panicker, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Travancore Devaswom Board. 2. The petitioner challenges Ext.P1 order of suspension passed by the Travancore Devaswom Board on 4.9.2008. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the grounds on which the petitioner was placed under suspension are neither true nor tenable. He further submits that though more than three months have been passed after the petitioner was placed under suspension, memo of charges has not so far been issued. The question whether the petitioner is guilty of the charges levelled against him in Ext.P1 or not, can be decided only after a detailed enquiry. The Board on the materials available before it, came to the prima facie W.P.(C) No.36440/2008 2 conclusion that the complaints levelled against the petitioner merit a detailed enquiry. The Board accordingly decided to place him under suspension pending such enquiry. It cannot therefore be said that the decision taken by the Board to place the petitioner under suspension was not warranted. 2. It is not in dispute that the provisions of the Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1960, hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules' for short, apply to employees of the Travancore Devaswom Board. Rule 10(6) of the said rules empowers the authority which passed the order of suspension to revoke it at any point of time. It is, therefore, open to the petitioner to move the Board and seek revocation of the order of suspension. Though the petitioner has already moved Exts.P3 and P4 representations seeking revocation of the suspension, they are not submitted before the competent authorities. 3. In these circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the contentions set out in this writ W.P.(C) No.36440/2008 3 petition, I dispose of the Writ Petition with the following directions. The petitioner shall, within two weeks from today, file an appropriate representation before the Travancore Devaswom Board. The Travancore Devaswom Board shall within six weeks thereafter consider the same and take a decision thereon, if necessary, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. The Board shall after taking a decision in the matter communicate its decision to the petitioner. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE nj.