IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 7TH JANUARY 2011 / 17TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 35832 of 2010(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- V.RADHAKRISHNA PILLAI, JUNIOR MANAGER (MARKETING & INSPECTION), TALUK DEPOT, SUPPLYCO, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. SMT.POOJA SURENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF CIVIL SUPPLIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF CIVIL SUPPLIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001. 4. THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION, GANDHI NAGAR, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682020. 5. THE ADDITIONAL GENERAL MANAGER(P&A), KERALA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION, GANDHI NAGAR, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682020. 6. THE DIRECTOR, VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. ADV. SMT.MOLLY JACOB,SC,SUPPLYCO FOR R4 & 5 GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.ANTONY MUKKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No.35832 of 2010 ================== Dated this the 7th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner's grievance in this writ petition is that although the petitioner was suspended more than a year ago, the disciplinary proceedings pursuant to suspension have not been completed yet. At the same time, the petitioner is continued on suspension indefinitely. The petitioner, therefore, seeks the following reliefs: “i) issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order calling for the records leading to Ext.P6 and quashing the same. ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing respondents 1 and 2 to reinstate the petitioner in service forthwith. iii) declare that the action of the respondents in not reinstating the petitioner in service is discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.” 2. By orders dated 17.12.2010 and 3.1.2011, I directed the learned Government Pleader to get instructions as to what proceedings have been taken in the disciplinary proceedings initiated by suspending the petitioner more than a year ago. 3. Today, the learned Government Pleader submits that no further proceedings have been taken in the matter. I am of opinion that after suspending the petitioner, the respondents have to take the proceedings to its logical conclusion expeditiously. 4. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: w.p.c.35832/10 2 The respondents shall see that the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner by suspending him shall be taken to its logical conclusion, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. If, for any valid reason, the respondents are unable to complete the proceedings within the said four months, the petitioner shall be reinstated in service, after the expiry of the said four months, if the respondents do not decide to revoke the suspension earlier. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge