IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 15TH JUNE 2010 / 25TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 15410 of 2010(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ARSHAD. M. KHAN, JUNIOR SUPERINTENDENT, SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA SRI.T.K.BIJU RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,DEPT. OF TRANSPORT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, TRANSPORT COMMISSIONERATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. ARAVINDHKUMAR BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.15410 OF 2010 (A) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a Junior Superintendent in the Regional Transport Office, Iringalakkuda. His grievance is that he has been excluded from Ext.P6 select list. This is apparently for the pendency of Exts.P2 and P3 charge sheets, to which the petitioner had submitted Ext.P4 explanation. Petitioner complains inordinate delay in finalizing the proceeding and including him in the select list. Government Pleader on instructions submits that considering the reply submitted by the petitioner to Exts.P2 and P3 charge sheets, the 2nd respondent has already addressed the first respondent to take a lenient view in the matter and to close the proceedings by imposing a punishment of warning. It is stated that this proposal was made by the 2nd respondent on 31.3.2010 and the proposal in pending before the first respondent. Therefore, at this stage, what is required to be done is that the first respondent should take a decision on Ext.P4, in the light of proposal made by the 2nd respondent. This the first respondent WPC.No. 15410/2010 :2 : shall do, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 6 weeks from the date of production of a copy of the judgment. Necessarily, dependent upon the decision, the petitioner's claim for consideration by the DPC shall also be dealt with. Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the first respondent for compliance. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/