IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 22ND MARCH 2010 / 1ST CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 37355 of 2009(L) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ M.V.GEETHA, JUNIOR ACCOUNTANT, PAYANGADI URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK, PAYANGADI, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. MR.M.SASINDRAN, MR.V.GIRISHKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE PAYANGADI URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, PAYANGADI, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, PAYANGADI URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., REPRESENTED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR, PAYANGADI, KANNUR DISTRICT. R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR.ABRAHAM GEORGE JACOB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.37355/2009 L APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET. P2: COPY OF THE ENQUIRY REPORT. P3: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE SUB COMMITTEE DTD. 18/07/2009. P4: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD. 23/07/2009. P5: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DTD. 28/07/2009 OF THE CHAIRMAN OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT BANK. P6: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DTD. 29/08/2009. P7: COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT BANK. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.37355 of 2009 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is working as a Junior Accountant in the first respondent bank. Earlier, she was working as a Senior Accountant and had been promoted as Internal Auditor. While she was working as Internal Auditor, allegations were raised against the petitioner and she was suspended. A domestic enquiry was conducted and on the basis of the enquiry report, the petitioner was reverted to the present post in which she is working. The petitioner has submitted Ext.P7 appeal before the second respondent challenging the findings of the enquiry officer as well as the proceedings taken against her. According to the petitioner, the appeal has not been disposed of by the second respondent till date. Therefore, she seeks appropriate directions for the disposal of her appeal on an early date. Adv.George Jacob who appears for the respondents has no objection to such a direction being issued. In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to consider the appeal of the petitioner, evidenced herein by Ext.P7, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate before 9.5.2010. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, Judge css/