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. 9744 of 2010(P) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.P.VARGHESE, ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER, CANTEEN STORES DEPARTMENT, GANDHI NAGAR, KOCHI. BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. SMT.POOJA SURENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, VIGILANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. E.SHIHABUDEEN, DEPUTY EXCISE COMMISSIONER, KANNUR. BY SRI. ANTONY MUKKATH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER, R1, R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P. (C) No. 9744 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 30th day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is an Assistant Excise Commissioner. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner as per Ext.P7. The Vigilance Tribunal after conducting the enquiry submitted a report to the Government. According to the petitioner, the said report completely exonerates him of the charges. Earlier, the Departmental Promotion Committee after considering the merit of the petitioner included him in Ext.P5 select list. The said inclusion was made prior to the initiation of the disciplinary proceeding as per Ext.P7. The petitioner submits that despite his inclusion in the select list to the post of Assistant Excise Commissioners fit for promotion as Deputy Commissioner of Excise he was denied the promotion solely on account of the pendency of the disciplinary proceedings initiated as per Ext.P7. 2. Indisputably, the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner as per Ext.P7 has been enquired into and final report has been submitted, by the Vigilance Tribunal. WPC.No. 9744 of 2010 : 2 : What remains for finalisation of the proceedings initiated against the petitioner as per Ext.P7 is the passing of final orders after consideration of the report submitted by the Vigilance Tribunal. Therefore, without making any observation as to the merit of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider the enquiry report submitted by the Vigilance Tribunal in respect of the charges levelled against the petitioner as per Ext.P7, and pass final orders thereon expeditiously, at any rate within a period of two months from today. Sd/- (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A. To Judge