IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 27TH MAY 2010 / 6TH JYAISHTA 1932 OP.No. 11281 of 2002(R) ----------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- N.KESAVA PILLAI, OZHUKUPARA VEEDU, PERUMKOOR, KONCHIRA P.O., VEMBAYAM, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECERETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS,SC,KPSC FOR R2 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P.NANDAKUMAR THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP.No. 11281 of 2002 APPENDIX EXHIBITS EXT.P1- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT DATED 22.9.00 IN CRL.M.P.4462 OF 2000 IN CRL.A.621 OF 2000 EXT.P2- TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE MEMO DATED 24.1.02 SERVED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXT.P3- TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 29.1.02 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER FOR EXT.P2 EXT.P4- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 5.4.02 SENT BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXT.P5- COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16.4.02 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT REMOVING THE PETITIONER FROM SERVICE (TRUE COPY) P.A TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J ....................... O.P.11281/2002 ....................... Dated this the 27th day of May, 2010 JUDGMENT Petitioner was a peon in Government Secretariat. He was due to retire on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.4.2002. While in service, he was implicated as 5th accused in C.C.No.26/1998 in the Court of Enquiry Commission and Special Judge, Thiruvananthapuram. Various offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act and Indian Penal Code were charged against the petitioner. Following his implication in the crime, he was placed under suspension but was later reinstated. On conclusion of the crime, learned Special Judge convicted the petitioner and sentenced him with imprisonment and fine. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, petitioner filed Crl.Appeal No.21/2000 before this Court and the sentence was suspended by Ext.P1 order. However, he was issued Ext.P2 show cause notice calling upon him to show cause why he shall not be removed from service based on the conviction in the criminal case. He filed Ext.P3 reply, but however by Ext.P5 order, O.P.11281/02 2 he was removed from service invoking the power under Rule 11 (1)(vii) of the Kerala Civil Services (C.C. & A) Rules. It is challenging Ext.P5 the writ petition is filed. 2. Since he was convicted in the criminal case, Government were justified in issuing Ext.P5 and removing him from service. However, in the appeal filed by the petitioner, if he was acquitted, the petitioner can claim the benefits that are due to him as if he had continued in service. Therefore, leaving it open to the petitioner to raise his claim for other benefits, if he is otherwise eligible for the same, the Original Petition is closed. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs