IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 7TH JUNE 2010 / 17TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 16608 of 2010(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- K.V.RAVEENDRAN PILLAI, (FORMERLY PEON, OFFICE OF THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, ALAPPUZHA), PANASSERIL HOUSE, AVALOOKKUNNU P.O., ALAPPUZHA-6. BY ADV. SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY SMT.N.SANTHA SRI.K.A.BALAN SRI.PETER JOSE CHRISTO SRI.S.A.ANAND RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TAXES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. 2. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, COMMISSIONERATE OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 033. 3. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 004. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.ARAVINDKUMAR BABU SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS, SC FOR PSC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 16608 OF 2010 (A) ===================== Dated this the 7th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner was a Peon in the Commercial Taxes Department. There was a disciplinary action against him. By Ext.P5 order, Sri.P.Mara Pandiyan, IAS, the then Commissioner of Commercial Taxes dismissed the petitioner from service with immediate effect. He filed appeal before the Government, a copy of which is Ext.P6. It would appear that the views of the PSC was also sought for and according to the petitioner, PSC recommended imposition of a lesser punishment of barring of three increments without cumulative effect. However, the officer who imposed punishment in his capacity as Principal Secretary to Tax Department differed with the view expressed by the PSC and forwarded the file to the Chief Minister. The Chief Minister by his order dated 11/3/2010, ordered finalisation of the proceedings. Petitioner submits that the matter has not been finalised so far. He also complains that the officer who acted as the disciplinary authority and imposed the punishment of dismissal on him is dealing with his appeal also. WPC No. 16608/10 :2 : 2. Going by the files produced by the petitioner as Ext.P8, it would appear that the officer who imposed the punishment on the petitioner in his capacity as the disciplinary authority, has dealt with the appeal also. This is clearly in violation of the principles of natural justice, since the same officer cannot sit in appeal over his own decision. Therefore, any view taken by the aforesaid officer cannot be used against him. 3. Therefore, the procedure as contemplated under Rule 33 of the CC&A Rules is to be followed. The appeal, as already seen, is still pending and the matter needs an early finalisation. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition directing that, the 1st respondent shall, on the production of a copy of this judgment, take steps for passing final orders on Ext.P6 appeal in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 3 months of production of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp