IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 6TH JANUARY 2009 / 16TH POUSHA 1930 OP.No. 35534 of 2001(E) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ K.SURESH KUMAR, (NO. 891402637 CONSTABLE)CISF UNIT, FACT UDYOGAMANDAL, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.KRB.KAIMAL (SR.) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. COMMANDANT, CISF UNIT, FACT LTD., UDYOGAMANDAL, ERNAKULAM. 2. DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL (SZ) RAJAJI BHAVAN, CHENNAI, 90. 3. UNION OF INDIA REP.BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI. ADV. SRI.JOHN VARGHESE, ASSISTANT SG SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON CMP. NO.57976/2001 IN OP. 35534/2001 DISMISSED 06.01.2009 SD/- S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT. 6.6.01. P2:- COPY OF THE FINAL ORDER NO.V-15014/KSK/MAJ I/2001/1499 DT. 6.7.01. P3:- COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM DT. 18.8.01 SUBMITTED TO THE IIND RESPONDENT. P4:- COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE NO.V-11014/62/01/L&R (SZ) /7291 DT. 26.9.01. P5:- COPY OF THE REPLY DT. 9.10.01 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE IIND RESPONDENT. P6:- COPY OF THE APPELLATE ORDER NO.V-11014/62/01/L&R (SZ) 8008 DT. 30.10.01. R1(a):- COPY OF THE SERVICE ORDER PART-I NO.55/89 DT. 14.7.89. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE tss S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ----------------------- O.P. NO. 35534 OF 2001 (E) -------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of January, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner was a constable in the Central Industrial Security Force. He was posted at the Cochin division of the FACT. He was put in charge of the records of Motor transport section. During that time, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him on allegations of misconduct. An enquiry was conducted, in which petitioner was found guilty of the misconducts alleged against him. By Exhibit P2, the disciplinary authority imposed on the petitioner the punishment of reduction to the minimum in the scale of pay of constable for a period of three years with effect from the date of that order. Petitioner filed Exhibit P3 appeal before the appellate authority. On receipt of the same, appellate authority issued Exhibit P4 show cause notice directing the petitioner to show cause why the petitioner should not be imposed with the punishment of removal from service for the misconduct proved against him. Despite Exhibit P5 reply to the same, Exhibit P6 has been passed by the appellate authority imposing on the petitioner the punishment of removal from service. Petitioner is challenging that order. O.P.No.35534/2001 - 2 - 2. After arguing for quite some time, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be permitted to avail of the remedy by way of revision under Rule 54 of the Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2001. After hearing both sides, I am inclined to grant an opportunity to the petitioner to file a revision under Rule 54 of the Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2001. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of as follows:- If the petitioner files a revision against the impugned order within one month from today, the Revisional Authority under Rule 54 of the Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2001 shall consider and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible. Sd/- S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE skr // True copy // P.A. to Judge.