IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 29TH JUNE 2009 / 8TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 15562 of 2009(M) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- C.MADHUMANI, SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, APB, KAVUVILAVEEDU, VIZHINJAM P.O., TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. MR.SALIM V.S. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, ARMED POLICE BATTALION & TP, ARMED POLICE HEADQUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P.(C) No. 15562 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 29th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT While the petitioner was working as Sub Inspector of Police in the Kerala Armed Police 2nd Battalion, he was placed under suspension, pending disciplinary action. The disciplinary action was finalized by Ext.P1 order dated 27-2-2008 reducing him to the rank of Assistant Sub Inspector of Police for a period of three years. On appeal filed by the petitioner, by Ext.P2 order dated 28-10-2008 the Director General of Police modified the punishment of reduction in rank to barring of one increment without cumulative effect. The petitioner's grievance is that though Ext.P1 order was implemented reducing his rank, in view of Ext.P2, as the said punishment has been modified, the respondents are bound to repost him as Sub Inspector of Police. 2. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that by order passed on 15-6-2009, the Inspector General of Police, Armed Police Battalion has promoted the petitioner to the rank of Sub Inspector of Police with immediate effect and posted him in Kerala Armed W.P.(C) No. 15562/2009 2 Police 5th Battalion. In view of the said development, no further orders are called for in this writ petition. It is accordingly closed as infructuous. If the petitioner has any subsisting grievance, he may move the competent authority among the respondents and the said authority shall on receipt of such a representation, consider the same and pass orders thereon within four months from the date of receipt of such representation. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. mn.