IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 10TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 19TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 15793 of 2004(E) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- K.KRISHNANKUTTY, DRIVER, KERALA STATE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR CHRISTIAN CONVERTS FROM SCHEDULED CASTES AND THE RECOMMENDED COMMUNITIES LTD., KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.P.REGHURAJ RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. KERALA STATE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR CHRISTIAN CONVERTS FROM SCHEDULED CASTES AND RECOMMENDED COMMUNITIES LTD., KOTTAYAM REPRESENTED BY ITS CHA MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FROM SCHEDULED CASTES AND RECOMMENDED COMMUNITES LTD., KOTTAYAM. 3. THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, KOTTAYAM. 4. THE CHAIRMAN, KERALA STATE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FROM SCHEDULED CASTES AND RECOMMENDED COMMUNITIES LTD., KOTTAYAM. 5. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE SC/ST DEPARTMENT, TRIVANDRUM. ADV. SPL.GOVT.PLEADER SRI.SHYSON P.MANKUZHA SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR FOR R1 SMT.P.V.ASHA,SC, KSDC-CHRISTIAN CONVERT FOR R1 TO R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.15793/2004 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1:- COPY OF THE ORDER DT 16.803 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P2:- COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 1.9.03 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P3:- COPY OF THE NOTICE DT. 4.9.03 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P4:- COPY OF THE EXPLANATION DT 6.9.03 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P5:- COPY OF THE NOTICE DT. 14.10.03 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P6:- COPY OF THE EXPLANATION DT 14.1.04 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P7:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DT 23.12.03 OF THE GOVERNMENT. True copy P.S. TO JUDGE tss KURIAN JOSEPH, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P(C) No. 15793 of 2004 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner approached this court with certain grievances regarding his service under the first respondent. It is seen that the petitioner has retired from service. In the counter affidavit the 5th respondent has stated that appropriate directions have been issued to the second respondent to take immediate action on Ext.P7 government letter. It is also stated in the counter affidavit that the petitioner was unnecessarily penalised. Subsequently, it is seen that, the second respondent has passed order dated 18-8-2004 reinstating the petitioner. But so far no steps have been taken to regularise the period during which he was kept out of service. Since even the government has taken the view that the petitioner was unnecessarily penalised there will be a direction to the second respondent to treat the period the petitioner was kept out of service as duty for all purposes. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE) ahg. KURIAN JOSEPH, J. ----------------------------------- W.P(C).No.15793 of 2004 ----------------------------------- JUDGMENT 10th November, 2008