IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1931 OP.No. 27413 of 2002(L) ----------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- O.V.OUSEPH, FOREST GUARD, KANNANKUZHY FOREST STATION, CHARPA RANGE, VAZHACHAL, FOREST DIVISION. BY ADV. MR.P.RAMAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF FOREST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PARAVATTASY, THRISSUR. 3. DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, MALAYATTOOR FOREST DIVISION, KODANADU P.O.-683544. 4. DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, VAZHACHAL FOREST DIVISION, CHALAKKUDY P.O. 5. DEPUTY FOREST CONSERVATOR, DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICE, MALAYATTOOR. 6. RANGE OFFICER, ATHIRAPPILLY FOREST RANGE OFFICE, EZHATTUMUGHAM P.O.-683 577. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. N. SUDHA DEVI FOR R1 TO 6 THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP.No. 27413 of 2002(L) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 21.8.2001 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 1.5.2002 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14.8.2002 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 - TRUE COPY OF G.O.NO.77/88 FOREST DATED 15.9.1988. EXT.P5 - TRUE COPY OF SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 24.4.2002 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P6 - TRUE COPY OF CHARGE MEMO DATED 18.7.2001 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P7 - TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 3.6.2002 ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. // TRUE COPY // PA TO JUDGE rhs S. SIRI JAGAN, J ............................................... O.P. No. 27413 of 2002 ................................................. Dated this the 11th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner was a forest guard at the time of filing this original petition. On allegation that the petitioner along with others failed to take any steps to arrest an accused involved in a forest offence and did not prevent unauthorised felling of trees, disciplinary proceedings were initiated, in which Ext.P1 order was passed directing recovery of an amount of Rs.286/- from his salary. That amount was also recovered from the petitioner. Thereafter all of a sudden, the petitioner was served with Ext.P2 order dated 1.6.2002, whereby for the same misconducts an amount of Rs.500/- was directed to be recovered from the petitioner's salary in two equal installments. This direction was issued on the reasoning that actually the loss caused to the Government was Rs.2,000/- and since one of the delinquents died and another retired from service, proportionate amounts had to be recovered from the petitioner. The petitioner contends that Ext.P2 order has been issued without issuing him any notice or affording him an opportunity of being heard. Although, a O.P. No. 27413 of 2002 -2- counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents, it is not disputed before me that before issuing Ext.P2, the petitioner has not been afforded and opportunity of being heard. Petitioner's appeal against Ext.P2 order was rejected by Ext.P3. Petitioner is challenging Exts.P2 and P3 orders. Petitioner is also challenging Exts.P5, P6 and P7 further notices in respect of similar other misconducts. As far as Exts.P2 and P3 are concerned, I am of opinion that, in so far as prior to issue of Ext.P3 petitioner has not been given a notice or hearing before issuing Ext.P2, those cannot be sustained. Accordingly, they are quashed. In respect of Exts.P5, P6 and P7 they are only show cause notices and petitioner's remedy lies in filing explanations and pursuing his remedies in accordance with law. The original petition is disposed of as above. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs