IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 12TH MARCH 2009 / 21ST PHALGUNA 1930 WA.No.292 of 2009 ---------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.35697/2008 Dated 19/12/2008 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ---------------------------- SHAJI LUKOSE, SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POLICE CONTROL ROOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CITY, RESIDING AT KALIYILAZHAKATHU VEED.P.O OZHUKUPARAKKAL, AYUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY MR.R.RAJASEKHARAN PILLAI, ADVOCATE. RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL OF POLICE, KERALA, POLICE HEADQUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, SOUTH ZONE, KERALA POLICE HEADQUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RANGE, NANDAVANAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY MR. BENNY GERVACIS, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------ Writ Appeal No.292 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 12th day of March, 2009. J U D G M E N T Kurian Joseph, J. The appellant is the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.35697/2008. The issue pertains to the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him culminating in imposition of barring of one increment with cumulative effect. One of the grounds taken in the writ petition was that the whole proceedings initiated against the petitioner after the enquiry are vitiated since copy of the enquiry report was not furnished to him. 2. Learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition holding that there was no case for the petitioner that any prejudice whatsoever had been caused to him on account of non-furnishing of copy of the enquiry report. We find that the petitioner had in fact been furnished with a copy of the enquiry report on taking W.A.No.292/2009 2 action on Exhibit P4 representation. Thereafter, he filed a petition dated 20.08.2005 before the Government. That was rejected as per communication dated 30.09.2006. Again the petitioner submitted another review petition as per Exhibit P6 and the same too was rejected as per Exhibit P7. It is stated in Exhibits P5 and P7 that Disciplinary Authority as well as the Appellate and Revisional Authority had adverted to all the relevant factors before taking a decision imposing punishment of barring of one increment, including consultation with the Public Service Commission. 3. One of the main contentions taken by the appellant is that at the time of alleged commission of offence, he was not on duty. Under Rule 93B of the Kerala Government Servants Conduct Rules, even if an employee is not on duty and if he is seen in a drunken stage in a public place, he is liable to be proceeded against. The authorities thus having considered all the relevant aspects of the matter on several occasions, we do not find that any new materials are placed before us so as to interfere with the lawful orders passed by the authorities. W.A.No.292/2009 3 Therefore, we find no merit in the appeal. It is accordingly dismissed. KURIAN JOSEPH JUDGE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE smp W.A.No.292/2009 4 KURIAN JOSEPH & S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JJ. W.A. No.292 OF 2009 J U D G M E N T 12.03.2009