IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 23RD MARCH 2009 / 2ND CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 6856 of 2009(B) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- V.SREEKUMAR,"SOORYA KIRAN",S.R.A.153 A, MANIKANTESWARAM.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.(RETD) SENIOR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES) BY ADV. SRI.S.D.ASOKAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVT.,GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR COIR DEVELOPMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTER(REGISTRAR OF INDUSTRIAL.CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. S.RAMAACHANDRAN,DEPUTY REGISTRAR, DIRECTORATE OF HANDLOOM AND TEXTILES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 6856 of 2009 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner retired as Senior co-operative Inspector (Special Grade) from the Industries Department on 31.05.2007. The writ petition is filed with the main relief to quash Ext.P11 by which recovery of amounts have been ordered against the petitioner. 2. Ext.P8 is the Show Cause Notice dated 1.9.2008 received by the petitioner proposing to finalise the disciplinary action against him by barring one annual increment with cumulative effect. Since the petitioner has already retired from service the amount equivalent will be deducted from his DCRG etc. Petitioner filed Ext.P9 representation before the 2nd respondent and after considering the same by Ext.P10 a final order has been passed. A punishment of barring of one annual increment with cumulative effect for one year and recover the amount equivalent from DCRG has been imposed by Ext.P10 order. W.P.(C) No. 6856 of 2009 2 3. The petitioner has now challenged the same in appeal before the Government as per Ext.P13. The learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that the Government may be directed to consider and pass orders on Ext.P13 within a time limit. 4. In the light of the fact that petitioner has already availing the statutory remedy, there will be a direction to the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P13 within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE bps