IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 17TH MAY 2010 / 27TH VAISAKHA 1932 WP(C).No. 12195 of 2010(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- P.T.PRAKASH, SUB GROUP OFFICER (UNDER SUSPENSION), PARIPPU DEVASWOM, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, KOTTAYAM GROUP. BY ADV. SRI.LIJI.J.VADAKEDOM RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER, NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SABARIMALA DEVASWOM, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. SRI.P.GOPAL, SC FOR TDB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 12195 OF 2010 (Y) ===================== Dated this the 17th day of May, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner was a Sub Group Officer on Sabarimala duty. On account of certain misconducts allegedly committed by the petitioner in 2004, by Ext.P1 order dated 21/12/04, he was placed under suspension. It is stated that in relation to the same incident, CC 56/05 charge sheeted against the petitioner is also pending trial before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Ranni. Petitioner submits that almost six years have elapsed and there is no reason to continue him under suspension and therefore sought its revocation by filing Ext.P2. There was no response and hence the writ petition. 2. Standing counsel for the respondents submits that on 16/3/10, memo of charges was served on the petitioner to which he has filed his reply and it is stated that expeditious steps are being taken to conclude the disciplinary action. It is also pointed out that amount due towards subsistence allowance has already been paid. 3. As already seen, the grievance of the petitioner is WPC No. 12195/10 :2 : regarding his continuance under suspension. In my view, having regard to the fact that the charge sheet has already been served on the petitioner and he has filed his reply, the proper course to be adopted at this distance of time is to direct the respondents to complete the disciplinary action on an expeditious basis. This shall be done, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within three months of production of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp