IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 13TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 17454 of 2009(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- THAJUNIZA, TECHNICAL ASSISTANT, DIRECTORATE OF AGRICULTURE, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. RESIDING AT JEMI BHAVAN, KANIYAPURAN P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.NANDAKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.17454/09 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: PHOTOCOPY OF THE SAID JUDGMENT DT 18.9.08 IN CC NO.53/2003 OF THE ENQUIRY COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL JUDGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXT.P2: PHOTOCOPY OF ORDER GO(MS) NO.116/09/AD DT 19.6.09 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P3: PHOTOCOPY OF ORDER NO.GO(MS) NO.156/2006/GAD DT 14.6.06 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: PHOTOCOPY OF JUDGMENT DT 8.10.09 RENDERED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN CRL.APPEAL NO.2208/08. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 17454 OF 2009 (B) ===================== Dated this the 4th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a Technical Assistant under the 2nd respondent. By Ext.P1 judgment rendered by the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge in CC No.53/03, petitioner was convicted for the offences under the Prevention and Corruption Act read with offences under the Indian Penal Code. Based entirely on Ext.P1 judgment, by Ext.P2 order dated 19/6/2009, petitioner was ordered to be removed from service. It was challenging Ext.P2 order, the writ petition was filed. 2. At the stage of admission, by order dated 24th of June, 2009, this Court directed that the petitioner shall be permitted to discharge her duties and on that basis, she is continuing in office. During the pendency of this writ petition, Criminal Appeal No.2208/08, filed by the petitioner against Ext.P1 judgment, has been allowed by this Court by Ext.P4 judgment rendered on 8/10/2009. By the said judgment, it has been held that the prosecution has failed to establish the offences against the petitioner and on that basis, she has been found not guilty of the WPC 17454/09 :2 : offences charged against her. 3. In view of Ext.P4 judgment acquitting the petitioner, and as Ext.P2 is entirely based on the conviction by Ext.P1, Ext.P2 order deserves to be set aside as against the petitioner and I do so. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp