IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER FRIDAY, THE 19TH DECEMBER 2008 / 28TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 34836 of 2008(V) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ R.SREEKUMARAN NAIR, OVERSEER (UNDER SUSPENSION),OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, NALANCHIRA SECTION, NALANCHIRA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, RESIDING AT REGHU NIVAS, KERALA DHITYAPURAM, POWDIKONAM P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.GOPAKUMAR R.THALIYAL SRI.N.P.PRAJEESH RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRSESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, VAIDHYUTHU BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VAIDHYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, KAZHAKUTTAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL SECTION, NALANCHIRA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE [ SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF POWER, - Deleted. GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R5 is deleted as per order dated 26/11/1008 in the writ petition. ADV. SRI.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB FOR R1-4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: A.K. Basheer, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P (C)No. 34836 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of December, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner who was working as Overseer in the office of the Assistant Engineer, Kerala State Electricity Board at Nalanchira in Thiruvananthapuram during November 2008 was placed under suspension pending enquiry against him and two others. The allegation against the petitioner and the other two is that because of their negligence, dereliction of duty and supervisory lapse one Sathyan, a wood cutter by profession, was electrocuted when he accidentally touched the stay wire. I do not propose to refer to the allegations made against the petitioner and other two employees elaborately at this stage, in view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner at the Bar. He submits that petitioner will be satisfied if a direction is issued to the Board to ensure that the enquiry against him is expedited. 2. Learned standing counsel for the Board submits that the enquiry will not be delayed if the petitioner submits his reply to the show cause notice. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he had already submitted his reply. In that view of the mater I find no reason why the enquiry against the petitioner shall be delayed. Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the authority concerned to complete the enquiry as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. A.K. Basheer Judge. an.