IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2011 / 8TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 16072 of 2010(H) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- V.J.FRANCIS, SENIOR ACCOUNTANT, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., IDUKKI BRANCH. BY ADVS. SRI.K.B.GANGESH SMT.SMITHA CHATHANARAMBATH RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, CO-OPERATION (B) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., COBANK TOWERS, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., COBANK TOWERS, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER R2 & R3 BY ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss W.P.(C) NO.16072/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 14.5.2010 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P2:- COPY OF THE ORDER OF SUSPENSION ISSUED TO THE PETITINER DTD. 25.4.2007. P3:- COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 29.1.2009 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BANK. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss P.N. RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.16072 of 2010 ------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T The prayer in this writ petition is to quash Ext.P1 order passed by the State Government and to declare that the State of Kerala has no authority to pass orders relating to suspension and reinstatement of employees of the Kerala State Co-operative Bank Ltd. 2. The petitioner who was working as a Senior Accountant in the Idukki Branch of the third respondent bank was placed under suspension on 25.4.2007. By order passed on 29.1.2009, the punishment of barring three increments was imposed on him. The bank also directed his reinstatement in service. Long thereafter, the Government sent Ext.P1 letter to the second respondent directing the second respondent to cancel the reinstatement of the petitioner and other employees in service, in view of the fact that an enquiry by the Vigilance Department is in progress. 3. The petitioner has along with I.A.No.9000/2010 produced Ext.P4 letter dated 17.6.2010 which discloses that the Vigilance & Anti Corruption Bureau had recommended that no action be taken against the petitioner. It is now conceded at the Bar that the Government have taken a final decision on the report of the Vigilance W.P.(C) No.16072 of 2010 2 & Anti Corruption Bureau and have concurred with the recommendation of the Director of Vigilance that no vigilance case need be registered against the petitioner. In view of the subsequent developments, the issue raised in this writ petition has become academic, as the direction issued by the Government in Ext.P1 letter has ceased to be effective. In such circumstances, no further orders are called for in this writ petition except to record that the petitioner stands exonerated in the vigilance enquiry referred to in Ext.P1 letter. P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. nj.