IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH MARCH 2011 / 25TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 8189 of 2011(W) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- P.K.JACOB, AGED 53 YEARS, S/O.P.C.KURIAN(LATE) EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KUTTANAD DEVELOPMENT DIVISION, THANEERMUKKOM 688 527, ALLEPPEY DISTRICT RESIDING AT PARAMBIL HOUSE, DIET VIMALALAYAM ROAD THODUPUZHA 685 584. BY ADVS. SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI SMT. SMITHA GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNEMNT DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES,GOVERNMENT OF KERALA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, (IRRIGATION & ADMINISTRATION) PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDINGS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. ANTONY MUKKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: SMT S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ----------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.8189 OF 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is working as Executive Engineer in the Kuttanad Development Division of the Water Resources Department of the Government of Kerala at Thanneermukkom, Alappuzha. According to the petitioner, the petitioner is eligible to be considered for promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer. The petitioner is not so considered for promotion in view of the disciplinary proceedings pending. According to the petitioner, there were two disciplinary proceedings. One has already been completed imposing on the petitioner a minor punishment. In the other disciplinary proceedings, Ext.P6 show cause notice has been issued proposing to impose a punishment of withholding of one annual increment without cumulative effect. The petitioner submits that Ext.P6 was issued on 4.12.2010 and the same has not been finalised, despite the petitioner filing Ext.P7 reply thereto and at the same time, the petitioner is not being considered for promotion. The petitioner, therefore, seeks W.P.(C)No.8189/11 2 the following reliefs: “i) To issue a Writ of Mandamus commanding the 1st respondent to complete the enquiry proceedings initiated against the petitioner as quickly as possible and at any rate within a time limit to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court. ii) To issue a Writ of Mandamus commanding the second respondent to immediately forward the defence statements submitted by the petitioner in answer to the Memo of charges and show cause notice to enable the first respondent to complete the disciplinary proceedings as quickly as possible. iii) To issue a Writ of Mandamus commanding the first respondent to consider the case of the petitioner also for promotion by placing his name before the Departmental Promotion committee or in the alternative direct the first respondent to keep one post of Superintending Engineer vacant to enable the petitioner to claim for it” 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: The respondents shall see that the proceedings evidenced by Ext.P6 is completed and taken to its logical conclusion as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Within a further period of one month therefrom, the petitioner's case for promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer shall also be considered and decision taken in accordance with law. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(C)No.8189/11 3 W.P.(C)No.8189/11 4