IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 27TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 3762 of 2010(U) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- R.RAJESH, VILLAGE OFFICER (UNDER SUSPENSION), MANNANKANDAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT, RESIDING AT OLEDATH HOUSE, MANAKAD.P.O., THODUPUZHA. BY ADVS. SRI.KRB.KAIMAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL SRI.V.MADHUSUDHANAN SRI.T.ISSAC RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER FOR LAND REVENUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P. NANDAKUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO. 3762 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of February, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner was working as Village Officer in Mannankandam in Idukki District. He was placed under suspension as per Ext.P1 dated 27.07.2009. It would reveal that he was placed under suspension based on the registration of vigilance case No.4/09/IDK by the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau. Against Ext.P1 order, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 representation before the third respondent under Rule 10(6) of K.C.S (C.C &A) Rules, 1960. Since no orders are passed thereon, the petitioner has filed Ext.P4 representation before the second respondent. However, no order was passed on Ext.P4 as well. It was in the said circumstances that this Writ Petition has been filed 2. When the matter was taken up for admission, the learned Government Pleader, on instruction, submitted that a charge sheet has been submitted by the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau before the Court of Enquiry Commission and Special Judge, Kottayam and the third respondent is awaiting a report from the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau. On W.P.(C) NO.3762 of 2010 2 receipt of such a report from the Vigilance Department, the order by which the petitioner was placed under suspension will be reconsidered in the light of the said report. In the circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the third respondent to review the suspension order expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of such a report from the Vigilance Department. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) NO.3762 of 2010 3 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. W.P.(C). NO.3762/2010 JUDGMENT 16th February, 2010