IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI TUESDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2008 / 7TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 22783 of 2008(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER: I.V. MICHEAL, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O. I.A.VARGHESE, ITTIPATTA HOUSE, PALARIVATTOM P.O., ERNAKULAM, COCHIN 682025. (REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, NOW UNDER ORDER OF SUSPENSION FROM SERVICE) BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANU SRI.S.K.PREMRAJ SRI.ANOOP JOSEPH SRI.ABHILASH AKBAR SRI.T.B.SIVAPRASAD RESPONDENTS: 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA VIGILENCE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, VIGILANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SUSPENSION REVIEW COMMITTEE, (FOR MEMBERS OF KERALA TRANSPORT SERVICE), GOVERNMENT OF KERALA GOVERNMENT SECREETARIAT, THIRUVANATHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY CHAIRMAN, ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. DIRECTOR OF VIGILANCE, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. WP(C).No. 22783 of 2008 -2- 6. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, VIGILENCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 7. DEPUTY SUPERINENDENT OF POLICE, VIGILENCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU, KOLLAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. M.R.SREELATHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).22783/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 29th day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner, Regional Transport Officer, was placed under suspension, on the basis of the recommendation by the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau, as evidenced by Ext.P1 order dated 30.3.2007. His grievance is that a review of suspension has not been considered by the Suspension Review Committee, in fact his name was not placed before the Review Committee, it was contended. 2. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader. It is necessary that the suspension of every employee should be reviewed every six months. 3. In the result, writ petition is disposed of directing the fifth respondent, Director of Vigilance, to place the name of the petitioner before the Suspension Review Committee, the third respondent, within three weeks from the date on which a copy of the judgment is received W.P.(C).22783/2008 2 by the Director. Suspension Review Committee shall thereafter, consider the petitioner's case for revocation of suspension and make its recommendation to the Government within one month from the date on which the petitioner's case is placed before it. Thereafter, second respondent shall take a decision on the petitioner's request for revocation of suspension on the basis of recommendation of the Suspension Review Committee and a decision shall be taken, at any rate, on or before 30.9.2008. Writ petition is disposed of as above. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs