IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 27TH AUGUST 2009 / 5TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 4075 of 2009(I) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- M.K.JAYALAKSHMI , W/O. UMESH AGED 43 YEARS, 7/172 , VEZHATH LANE, EMILIE, KALPETTA, SWEEPER, KALPETTA MUNICIPALITY. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW ABRAHAM RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE SECRETARY,KALPETTA MUNICIPALITY KALPETTA. 2. THE SECRETARY LOCAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, TRIVANDRUM. ADV. SRI.JOE JOSEPH KOCHIKUNNEL FOR R1 GOVT.PLEADER SRI.ANTONY MUKKATH FOR R2. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC.4075/2009-I APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P1 COPY OF THE ORDER OF FIRST RESPONDENT DT. 26.9.2001. EXT.P2 COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 14.10.2001. EXT.P3 COPY OF THE DECISION DT. 19.11.2001 OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DT. 23.1.2003 FILED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P5 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY PETITIONER DT. 6.2.2003. EXT.P6 COPY OF THE APPLICATION DT. 5.10.2006. EXT.P7 COPY OF THE MEMO DT. 7.10.2006. EXT.P8 COPY OF THE EXPLANATION DT. 7.10.2006. EXT.P9 COPY OF SUSPENSION ORDER DT. 17.10.2006. EXT.P10 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DT. 15.11.2006. EXT.P11 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT.4.1.2007 IN O.P.7299/2003. EXT.P12 COPY OF THE MEMO DAT. 5.1.20907 ISSUED BY FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P13 COPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER DT. 18.1.2007. EXT.P14 COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER DT.5.11.2007. EXT.P15 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT. 5.11.2007. EXT.P16 COPY OF THE MINUTES REPORT DT. 19.12.2008. EXT.P17 COPY OF THE ORDER OF FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P18 COPY OF THE ORDER OF FIRST RESPONDENT DT. 28-1-2009. EXT.P19 COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DT. 26.11.2008. EXT.P20 COPY OF THE ORDER OF FIRST RESPONDENT DT. 27.3.2009. EXT.P21 COPY OF THE REVISION DT. 3.7.2009 FILED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P22 COPY OF THE APPEAL DT. 27.7.2009 BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : EXT.R1(a) COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF CHAIR PERSON DT. 21.2.2008. EXT.R1(b) COPY OF THE ENQUIRY REPORT DT. 14.11.2008. EXT.R1(c) COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF CHAIR PERSON DT. 5.1.2009. / TRUE COPY / PA TO JUDGE dkr P.N.RAVINDRAN, J ------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No. 4075 of 2009-I ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 27th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT Heard Sri.Mathew Abraham, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.Joe Joseph Kochikunnel, the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent and Sri.Antony Mukkath, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the second respondent. 2. The petitioner was an employee of the Kalpetta Municipality. She was in occupation of a residential quarter belonging to the Municipality. Disciplinary action was taken against her and based on the findings in the enquiry report, the Municipal Council, which met on 19-12-2008 decided to impose on her the punishment of dismissal from service. Ext.P16 is a true copy of the resolution adopted by the Municipal Council in that regard. Thereupon, Ext.P17 order dated 5-1-2009 was issued by the Chairperson of the Municipality dismissing the petitioner from service. A week later, Ext.P18 notice was issued calling upon the W.P.(C) No.4075/2009-I 2 petitioner to vacate the residential quarter occupied by her. This Writ Petition was thereupon filed challenging Exts.P16, P17 and P18. The first respondent has filed a counter-affidavit resisting the Writ Petition. The first respondent contends, inter alia, that the petitioner has an effective and meaningful remedy by way of appeal before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions and therefore this Writ Petition is not maintainable. 3. It appears that the petitioner had initially moved the Municipal Council itself in appeal and later the State Government on the assumption that the said authorities are competent to entertain appeals arising from Exts.P16 to P18. The petitioner has now filed Ext.P22 appeal before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions along with applications to condone the delay in filing the appeal and for staying further proceedings pursuant to the order impugned in the appeal. Under Section 509 of the Kerala Municipality Act, the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions is competent to entertain an appeal from an order of dismissal from service. In such circumstances, as the petitioner has invoked the appellate remedy available to her, I am of the opinion that she should W.P.(C) No.4075/2009-I 3 await the outcome of the appeal before seeking the intervention of this Court. Under Section 509 of the Kerala Municipality Act, the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions is also competent to condone the delay in filing the appeal. Since the order impugned in the appeal filed by the petitioner is one dismissing her from service, I am of the opinion that the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions should entertain Ext.P22 appeal as one filed within time and pass orders thereon expeditiously. 4. I accordingly dispose of the Writ Petition with direction to the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions to consider Ext.P22 appeal and pass orders thereon after notice to and affording the petitioner and the Kalpetta Municipality a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions shall endeavour to dispose of the appeal expeditiously and in any event, within four months from the date on which the first respondent produces a certified copy of this judgment. I also direct that till orders are passed on the appeal as directed above and for a period of two weeks thereafter, the order imposing the punishment of dismissal from service shall stand stayed. During the said period the W.P.(C) No.4075/2009-I 4 petitioner shall also not be evicted from the residential quarter presently occupied by her. Thereafter, the rights of parties will be governed by the order passed by the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, subject to their right to challenge the same in other appropriate proceedings, if they are aggrieved thereby. The contention of both sides on the merits are kept open. The petitioner shall co-operate with the hearing and disposal of the appeal and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments. If due to the fault of the petitioner, the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions is not in a position to dispose of the appeal within the time limit stipulated above, it will be open to the Kalpetta Municipality to move this Court to vacate the order of stay granted by this judgment. P.N.RAVINDRAN,JUDGE. dkr