IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 17TH DECEMBER 2009 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 36486 of 2009(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ SURESH.J, DEPUTY RANGE OFFICER, AREEKKAKAVU TIMBER DEPOT, PUNALUR TIMBER SALES DIVISION, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, HIGH RANGE CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM. 2. SRI.KOCHUKANJIRAM, ASSISTANT FOREST CONSERVATOR, TIMBER SALES DIVISION, PARAMBPUZHA, KOTTAYAM (ENQUIRY OFFICER APPOINTED TO CONDUCT ENQUIRY AGAINST THE PETITIONER) SR.GOVT.PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 36486 OF 2009 (E) ===================== Dated this the 17th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T While working as Forester, by Ext.P1 order dated 21/6/06, the petitioner was placed under suspension on allegations of misconduct. Thereafter, he was reinstated in service on 12/2/2009 without prejudice to continuance of the disciplinary action. 2. He was thereafter issued Ext.P2 memo of charges and Ext.P3 explanation was submitted. The explanation was not accepted and by Ext.P4, the 2nd respondent was appointed as the Enquiry Officer. According to the petitioner, enquiry was completed and was concluded on 19/11/2008. But, however, the enquiry officer has not so far submitted his report, as a result of which, the disciplinary proceedings remains inconclusive causing grave prejudice to the petitioner. 3. It is seen that contending of the above and praying for expeditious finalisation of the disciplinary proceedings, petitioner has submitted Ext.P6 representation before the 1st respondent. Even that representation has not been considered. It is in these circumstances, the writ petition is filed. WPC 36486/09 :2 : 4. If as stated by the petitioner, the enquiry was concluded as early as on 19/11/2008, prima facie there cannot be any reason for the inordinate delay in submitting the report and finalising the proceedings. In any case, now that the petitioner has approached the 1st respondent pointing out this injustice and the prejudice that he has suffered by filing Ext.P6 representation, I direct the 1st respondent to deal with his contentions and pass appropriate orders remedying his grievance. This shall be done, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 6 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp