IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER FRIDAY, THE 19TH DECEMBER 2008 / 28TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 37849 of 2008(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- M.C. THULASEEDHARAN, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O. R. MADHAVAN KANI, (ASSISTANT SUB-INSPECTOR OF PROTECTION FORCE, SOUTHERN RALWAY/OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR OF PROTECTION FORCE/RAILWY PROTECTION FORCE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM) RESIDING AT KALAYAPURAM KOLLAYIL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.T.C.GOVINDA SWAMY RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY HEAD QUARTERS OFFICE, PARK TOWN P.O., CHENNAI -3. 2. THE ASSISTANT SECURITY COMMISSIONER (RPF), SOUTHERN RALWAY, THIRUVANANTHAPURM. 3. THE DIVISIONAL SECURITY COMMISSIONER (RPF), SOUTHERN RAILWAY, TRIVANDRUM. 4. THE DEPUTY SECURITY, COMMISSIONER, RAILWAY PROTECTION FORCE,SOUTHERN RAILWAY, CHENNAI -3. ADV. SRI.N.B.SUNIL NATH,SC, RAILWAYS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C).No.37849 OF 2008-E - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of December, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner, who is stated to be working as an Assistant Sub Inspector in the Railway Protection Force, Southern Railway at Trivandrum, was charge sheeted by the competent authority on the three counts of charge enumerated in Ext.P4. By Ext.P1 order, respondent No.3 upheld the findings of the enquiry officer that charge Nos. 1 and 2 had been proved. Accordingly, petitioner was imposed with the punishment of reduction in rank by one stage i.e. from ASIPF to Head Constable for a period of three years (NR). It is the admitted position that the petitioner has preferred Ext.P9 appeal against Ext.P1 order. It is seen from Ext.P9 that the appeal was preferred on November 02, 2008. 2. The primary prayer in this writ petition is to issue a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P1. The above prayer on the face of it is untenable since admittedly, petitioner has already availed of the statutory remedy available to him by preferring Ext.P9 appeal. The other prayer in the writ petition 2 WPC.NO.37849/08 is to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus to grant all consequential service benefits as if Ext.P1 had not been issued at all. This prayer is also wholly untenable. 3. However, having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the respondents, I am satisfied that the writ petition can be disposed of with a direction to the appellate authority to take a decision on Ext.P9 appeal without any delay. 4. In the above facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.4 to consider and pass orders on Ext.P9 strictly on its merit and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to mention, the petitioner shall be afforded sufficient opportunity to be heard before a decision is taken in the appeal. (A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE) cl 3 WPC.NO.37849/08