IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 10TH JANUARY 2011 / 20TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 24544 of 2004(V) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- V.V.THOMAS, MECHANIC, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, ERATTUPETTA. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANU RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND SECRETARY, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SRI.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR,SC,KSRTC BY ADV. SRI.SAJEEVKUMAR K.GOPAL, SC, KSRTC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.24544/2004 V APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.VLC2-019503/2004 DTD. 2/06/2004 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. P2: COPY OF THE APPEAL PETITION DTD. 4/06/2004 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P3: COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE PETITIONER'S COUNSEL TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P4: COPY OF THE MEMO BEARING NO.VLC 2-019503/2004 DTD. 22/06/2004 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. P5: COPY OF THE MEMO OF CHARGES BEARING NO.VLC 2- 019503/2004 DTD. 9/06/2004 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. P6: COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.VLC 2-019503/04 DTD. 5/07/2004 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. P7: COPY OF THE MEMO BEARING NO.PL3-393/04/PBVR DTD. 13/07/2004 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER, PERUMBAVOOR TO THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. ---------------------------- W.P.(C)No.24544 of 2004 ---------------------------- Dated 10th January, 2011 JUDGMENT While working as Mechanic in the Perumbavoor Depot of the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (for short `the Corporation') the petitioner was placed under suspension as per Ext.P1. Evidently, he was placed under suspension on being found wandering in the garage premises after consuming liquor. Feeling aggrieved by the order of suspension Ext.P2 appeal was preferred. Thereafter, the petitioner had approached this Court by filing W.P.(C)No.16953 of 2004. Later, the petitioner was issued with Ext.P4 memo requiring him to appear before the third respondent on 28.6.2004. Pursuant to the same, he had appeared before the third respondent on 28.6.2004. Subsequently, Ext.P5 memo of charges has been served on the petitioner. Essentially, it carried the same allegations. According to the petitioner, without affording him an adequate opportunity to file a statement of defence Ext.P6 order was passed whereby a punishment of barring of increment for a period of one year with cumulative effect was imposed. Later, the petitioner was reinstated in service as per Ext.P7 and was transferred to the Depot of the Corporation at Erattupetta. A perusal of the contentions would reveal that violation of the principles of natural justice and dis- WP(C).No.24544/2004 2 proportionality of the penalty have been raised as reasons to assail Ext.P6 by the petitioner. Though the petitioner has submitted that Ext.P5 memo was served on him only on 7.7.2004 and by virtue of the same he should have been granted time till 22.7.2004 for submitting his statement of defence, there is nothing on record to support the said contentions. Evidently, Ext.P5 is dated 9.6.2004. Even if the aforesaid contentions raised by the petitioner are taken as correct, the same cannot be a reason for interfering with Ext.P6 for the simple reason that going by Ext.P6, the impugned order, the petitioner himself had admitted the commission of the offence alleged against him and requested for pardon. It is taking into account the said admission and the further request for pardon that a lenient view was taken and he was imposed only with the punishment of increment bar for a period of one year with cumulative effect. That apart, the period of suspension was directed to be regularised as leave without allowances. 2. I have carefully gone through the pleadings in this writ petition. Though in Ext.P6 it has been specifically stated that the commission of the offence alleged against him was admitted by the petitioner, the said aspect was not at all refuted in the writ petition. In the said circumstances, the petitioner cannot contend, even in case of WP(C).No.24544/2004 3 violation of principles of natural justice that on account of the same any prejudice has been caused to him. Violation of the principles of natural justice alone will not invite interference invariably in all cases. When the concerned person fails to prove the prejudice on account of the violation of the principles of natural justice, an order need not be interfered with. In this case, evidently, the petitioner has admitted the commission of the charges levelled against him and sought for pardon before the authorities. Obviously, taking into account the said circumstances a lenient view was taken and after dispensing with an enquiry under Rule 15 of the Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1960 the above punishment has been imposed on him. In the said circumstances, I am of the view that Ext.P6 does not call for interference on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice. 3. The second contention raised to assail Ext.P6 is that the punishment imposed as per Ext.P6 is disproportionate to the gravity of the offence alleged against him. That apart, it is submitted that the petitioner was imposed with four penalties on the same set of allegations such as (1) suspension (2) transfer from Perumbavoor to Erattupetta (3) barring of increment for a period of one year with cumulative effect and (4) denial of allowance during the period of suspension. Going by the WP(C).No.24544/2004 4 provisions under the Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules and also the settled position of law no one can contend that suspension should be treated as a punishment. There is no merit in the said contention of the petitioner. Admittedly, as per Ext.P7 the petitioner was reinstated in service on culmination of the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him as per Ext.P6. True that, while reinstating him in service he was transferred to the depot at Erattupetta. Merely because of that it cannot be contended that the order of transfer smacks of punitive. No specific ground has been raised in the writ petition to challenge the transfer. A vague contention that it is punitive will not be sufficient to interfere with transfer of an employee. In the absence of allegation of malafides I do not find any illegality in the transfer order in the facts and circumstances of this case. In fact, the only punishment imposed on him was barring of an increment for a period of one year with cumulative effect. Necessarily, while reinstating an employee on culmination of the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him/her the period of his/her suspension has to be regularised. In this case, evidently, the period of suspension was regularised as leave without allowances. The same cannot be construed as a punishment at all. In the said circumstances, I am unable to countenance with any of WP(C).No.24544/2004 5 his contentions. The punishment imposed as per Ext.P6 cannot be construed as a punishment disproportionate to the gravity of the charges levelled against him. Therefore, there is no merit in the contention that four penalties, as mentioned above, were imposed on him in respect of the misconduct alleged against him as per Ext.P5. In fact, the only punishment that was imposed on him based on his admission of the commission of offence was only barring of increment for a period of one year with cumulative effect. For the foregoing reasons, I find no reason to interfere with Ext.P6. This writ petition is devoid of any merit and accordingly, it is dismissed. Sd/- C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS