IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 5TH APRIL 2011 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 7038 of 2011(D) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.V.SATHYAN, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.VASAVAN, MULLASSERY HOUSE, MUHAMMA P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. (RETIONING INSPECTOR, UNDER SUSPENSION). BY ADV. SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.K.S.PRAVEEN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PIN NO.695 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF CIVIL SUPPLIES, OFFICE OF THE CIVIL SUPPLIES COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PIN NO.695 001. 3. THE TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER, TALUK SUPPLY OFFICE, VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. PIN - 686 145. GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.ANTONY MUKKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 7038 of 2011 ================== Dated this the 5th day of April, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a Rationing Inspector in the Civil Supplies Department working at Taluk Supply office, Vaikom. By order dated 1.7.2010, the 2nd respondent placed the petitioner and another Rationing Officer under suspension on certain allegations of misconduct. Against the suspension, the petitioner has filed Ext.P4 petition for review of the suspension before the 1st respondent. The petitioner seeks a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 expeditiously. Having heard the learned Government Pleader also, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. It would be open to the petitioner to place before the 1st respondent materials in support of the petitioner's case including materials to show that the other person, who had been suspended along with the petitioner, has been reinstated in service, the applicability of which, shall also be considered by the 1st respondent. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge 2