IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 30TH MARCH 2010 / 9TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 9546 of 2010(P) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ K.LALJI, S/O.KUTTAN, AGED 43, CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MATTANCHERRY, KOCHI-2, RESIDING AT SOPANAM, HARITHA NAGAR, CHAMPAKKARA, KOCHI-38. BY ADVS. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR, SRI.P.MARTIN JOSE, SRI.P.PRIJITH, SRI.S.VAIDYANATHAN. RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (HOME DEPARTMENT), GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE CONVENOR, DEPARTMENT PROMOTION COMMITTEE (HIGHER), GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, TRIVANDRUM. 4. SRI.P.H.ASHRAF, SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CBCID SIG-II, ERNAKULAM. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. ANTONY MUKKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P. (C) No. 9546 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 30th day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is presently working as a Circle Inspector of Police in the General Executive Branch of the Police Department. In Ext.P1 select list of Circle Inspectors fit for promotion to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police, the petitioner and 9 other persons were not included. It is submitted that his non-inclusion was on account of the pendency of disciplinary proceedings initiated against him. The said enquiry proceedings was being delayed on account of an order of stay passed by this court on all further proceedings in the said matter in WP(C)9077/09. Later, as per judgment dated 15.3.2010, the said Writ Petition was dismissed as withdrawn. Earlier, this court as per Ext.P8 judgment in WP(C) No.952/09 directed the respondents to complete the enquiry and submit the PR Minutes within three months from 9.1.2009. The said direction in Ext.P8 judgment could not have been complied with because of the interim order passed in WP(C) No.9077/09. Now that the said writ WPC.No.9546 of 2010 : 2 : petition has been dismissed as withdrawn there cannot be any impediment at all to proceed with the disciplinary proceedings and to finalise the same expeditiously. According to him during the pendency of the said disciplinary proceedings several of his juniors were promoted to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police. 2. The learned Government Pleader, upon instructions, submitted that four months time is required for completing the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner. Ext.P7 is the memo of charges issued to the petitioner and it would reveal that the disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him on 24.9.2008. That apart, Ext.P8 would reveal that this court has fixed a time limit of three months for completion of the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner as per Ext.P7. Therefore, I am of the view that the respondents are bound to complete the enquiry proceedings within the said time limit of three months. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1 and 3 to take steps to see that the enquiry initiated against the petitioner is completed and final order is passed thereon WPC.No.9546 of 2010 : 3 : within three months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. Needless to say that based on the outcome of the enquiry proceedings, the eligibility of the petitioner for inclusion in the select list shall also be considered expeditiously. Sd/- (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A To Judge