IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 20362 of 2008(Y) --------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. C.U.MATHEW, HEAD SURVEYOR (UNDER SUSPENSION), OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS (RE-SURVEY), NEDUMKANDAM. 2. S.NOUSHAD, FIRST GRADE SURVEYOR (UNDER SUSPENSION) OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS (RE-SURVEY), NEDUMKANDAM. 3. A.ANDREWS. SUPERINTENDENT OF SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS (UNDER SUSPENSION), OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS (REG-SURVEY), NEDUMKANDAM. BY ADV. SMT.I.SHEELA DEVI. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. ANTONY MUKKATH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.20362/2008-Y: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. G2:18015/07 DTD. 31/08/2007 ISSUED BY THE R.2. TO THE P.3. EXT.P.1.A COPY OF THE ORDER NO. G5.18162/2007 DTD. 31/08/2007 ISSUED BY THE R.2. TO THE P.2. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE P.1. DTD. 28/02/2008 BEFORE THE R.2. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE P.2. DTD. 29/02/2008 BEFORE THE R.2. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE P.3. DTD. 15/04/2008 BEFORE THE R.2. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.11872/2008 DTD. 08/04/2008. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. G2.18015/2007 DTD. 17/06/2008 ISSUED BY THE R.2. TO THE PETITIONERS. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. G.O. (RT).NO.3524/2008/RD DTD. 06/11/2008 OF THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.20362/2008-Y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 24th day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T The writ petition was originally filed by the petitioners challenging their suspension for a direction to revoke the order of suspension and reinstate them in service. This Court after perusing the counter affidavit on behalf of the second respondent and after noticing the fact that the Director of Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau has by his letter dated 17/07/2008, informed the second respondent that the Vigilance Department has no objection in reinstating the petitioners in service, provided they are posted out of Idukki District, by an interim order dated 15/10/2008, directed the first respondent to take a final decision regarding the revocation of suspension of the petitioners. 2. Thereafter, as per Ext.P7 order dated 06/11/2008, the Government rejected their request for reinstatement in the service. 3. A reading of Ext.P7 shows that the Director of Survey and Land Records in his letter dated 13/08/2008 had informed the Government that since the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau has expressed their willingness as per letter dated 17/07/2008, to reinstate the petitioners into service and to post them outside Idukki District. But in paragraph (4) it is stated that the Vigilance Department as per reference letter (5) dated 27/09/2008, informed that the Suspension Review Committee held on 30/07/2008 decided not to recommend W.P.(C) No.20362/2008 -:2:- the reinstatement of the petitioners, since the investigation is pending. In view of the above position the representation was rejected. Ext.P7 is challenged, in the amended writ petition. 4. Pending the writ petition, the first petitioner attained superannuation on 31/01/2009. 5. In the counter affidavit filed in the writ petition, the stand taken is that at that point of time an Enquiry Commission was also enquiring the matter and that final vigilance report has not been received. Altogether one year and 6 months have lapsed after the order of suspension has been passed, which is dated 31/08/2007. Under Rule 10(6) of the Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, “an order of suspension made or deemed to have been made under this rule may at any time be revoked by the authority which made or is deemed to have made the order or by any authority to which that authority is subordinate.” Already, one of the persons who was suspended namely, the first petitioner has attained superannuation. Even though the Suspension Review Committee at that point of time did not agree for the reinstatement of the petitioners, the Government is having all powers to reconsider the issue in the light of the specific power conferred under Rule 10 (6) of the KCS(CC&A) Rules. Even going by the averments in the counter affidavit and paragraph (3) of the order Ext.P7, the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau in their letter dated 17/07/2008 have expressed their W.P.(C) No.20362/2008 -:3:- willingness to reinstate the petitioners in their service and to post them outside Idukki District, which fact was communicated by the Director of Survey and Land Records to the Government. Therefore, even though the representations were rejected as per Ext.P1 nothing prevents the Government from reconsidering the matter in the light of the fact that the first petitioner has already attained superannuation and more time has elapsed after the passing of Ext.P7 order. 6. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the first and second respondents to consider afresh the request made by the petitioners to revoke the order of suspension. The Government is free to take a decision after calling for a fresh report from the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau and from the second respondent Director of Survey and Land Records as to whether the petitioners 2 and 3 need be kept under suspension pending further action in the matter. Appropriate orders shall be passed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment. The petitioners will be free to file a fresh representation which will be produced along with the copy of the judgment within a period of ten days from today. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms