IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 18TH JUNE 2009 / 28TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 8092 of 2009(F) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- C.VIJAYAN, "SABARI" HOUSE, GURUVAYURAPPAN COLLEGE P.O., KOZHIKODE 673 014, (GARDNER, MALABAR BOTANICAL GARDEN SOCIETY, (TERMINATED). BY ADV. MR.K.PRAVEEN KUMAR. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. MALABAR BOTANICAL GARDEN SOCIETY, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, GURUVAYOORAPPAN COLLEGE P.O., KOZHIKODE. 3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, MALABAR BOTANICAL GARDEN SOCIETY, GURUVAYOORAPPAN COLLEGE POST, KOZHIKODE. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR. P. NANDAKUMAR, R2 & R3 BY ADV. MR. K. PRAVEENKUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/06/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.8092/2009-F: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN C.M.P. 1023/02 IN O.P. 623/02 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P. 623/02 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE R.2. DTD. 25/09/08. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE REPLY FILED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION SENT BY THE R.3. DTD. 13/10/08. EXT.P.6.(1): COPY OF THE NOTICE BOARD INSTALLED IN FRONT OF THE BOTANICAL GARDEN. EXT.P.6.(2): COPY OF THE NOTICE BOARD INSTALLED IN FRONT OF THE BOTANICAL GARDEN. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM PUBLISHED IN THE MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DTD. 11/02/2009. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION SENT BY THE R.3. DTD. 05/03/2009. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P.(C) No. 8092 OF 2009 - F =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 18th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT Heard Sri. K. Praveen Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. P.Nandakumar, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent. Though respondents 2 and 3 have been served, they have not entered appearance. 2. The petitioner who was working as Gardner in the Botanical Garden at Kozhikod has filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P8 letter dated 5-3-2009 issued by the third respondent restraining him from attending to work from 3-3-2009 onwards. It is submitted that the petitioner misbehaved to the Managing Director and thereupon he was asked not to report for duty. Ext.P8 also states that complaints have been filed against the petitioner in the Nallalam Police Station on 2-3-2009 and 3-3-2009. 3. When this writ petition was came up for hearing on 3-6-2009, the learned Government Pleader was directed to get instructions from the Sub Inspector of Police, Naallalam as to whether any crime has been registered against the petitioner based on the complaints submitted by the third respondent. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that W.P.(C) No. 8092/09 2 though a complaint was received, no crime has been registered against the petitioner. In my opinion, being an autonomous body under the Government of Kerala the second respondent cannot terminate services of employees without following the prescribed procedure. Ext.P3 discloses that without any enquiry, the service of the petitioner has been terminated. The stand taken by respondents 2 and 3 in Ext.P8 cannot in my opinion be sustained. In the result, the writ petition is allowed, Ext.P8 is quashed and respondents 2 and 3 are directed to re-admit the petitioner to duty forthwith on the same terms and conditions on which he was being engaged prior to Ext.P8. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. mn.