IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 15TH JANUARY 2010 / 25TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 36014 of 2009(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- DR.SINDHI.S, W/O.DR.SHAHIR SHAH, AGED 42 YEARS, CIVIL SURGEON (GYNECOLOGY), GOVERNMENT TALUK HEAD QUARTERS HOSPITAL, PUNALUR. BY ADV. SRI.C.UNNIKRISHNAN (KOLLAM) SRI.S.HARIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER, KOLLAM. 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT, GOVERNMENT TALUK HEAD QUARTERS HOSPITAL, PUNALUR. 5. DR.SHAHUL HAMEED, SUPERINTENDENT, GOVERNMENT TALUK HEAD QUARTERS HOSPITAL, PUNALUR. BY GOVT.PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.36014 of 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of January, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a Civil Surgeon (Gynaecology) working in the Gynaecology Wing of the Government Taluk Head Quarters Hospital, Punalur. She has approached this Court complaining of the inaction of the third respondent/DMO on her complaints, which are filed against the 5th respondent, Superintendent of the Hospital. The complaint of the petitioner is that the 5th respondent was subjecting her to harassment in her workplace. Though she has submitted Exts.P1 and P6 petitions before the third respondent, no action has been taken thereon to inquire into the allegations contained therein or to take appropriate action. Instead, she has been served with Ext.P8 memo by the 5th respondent. 2. The Government Pleader on instructions submits WPC No.36014/2009 2 that Ext.P8 memo has been issued on the basis of complaints received from the Circle Inspector of Police, Punalur as well as the lady Constable who had accompanied a rape victim who was brought for medical examination to the petitioner. On the basis of the complaints, it is pointed out that action has been initiated by the 5th respondent. 3. The counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to the allegations raised by the petitioner against the 5th respondent and also the complaint of the Nursing Assistant, Ext.P7. On the basis of Ext.P7, it is pointed out that the 5th respondent is deliberately trying to victimise the petitioner. However, it is not disputed that Exts.P1 and P6 are pending consideration of the third respondent, who is the authority to inquire into the allegations. 4. In view of the above, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the third respondent to inquire into WPC No.36014/2009 3 the allegations contained in Exts.P1 and P6 and to pass final orders thereon, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, which the petitioner shall produce before the said authority for compliance. The District Medical Officer shall also consider the grievance of the petitioner that no orders have been passed on the leave application submitted by her evidenced by Ext.P5 and pass orders thereon, without further delay. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE css/