IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 29TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 7TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 27045 of 2008(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- RAVEENDRAN NAIR, FIRST GRADE SURVEYOR OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT, OF RE-SURVEY, NEDUMKANDAM. BY ADV. SMT.I.SHEELA DEVI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF OSURVEY & LAND RECORDS THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.27045 of 2008 ------------------------------- Dated this the 29th September, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is presently working as First Grade Surveyor. By Ext.P2 memo of charges, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner and that led to Ext.P4 order dated, 21.7.2007, being passed by the Director of Survey. By Ext.P4 order, the punishment of reduction in rank in the seniority list was imposed on the petitioner. The petitioner submits that he has filed Ext.P5 appeal before the Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, challenging Ext.P4 order, and that during the pendency of the appeal, the punishment imposed as per Ext.P4 was implemented by issuing Ext.P7 order. The petitioner has, in this writ petition, inter alia prayed for an expeditious disposal of Ext.P5 appeal. The petitioner also submits that the imposition of the punishment, while Ext.P5 appeal was pending, was not proper. W.P.(C) No.27045 of 2008 2 2. I have heard Smt.I.Sheela Devi, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Anu Sivaraman, the learned Government Pleader, appearing for the respondents. Ext.P6 discloses that Ext.P5 appeal filed by the petitioner was forwarded by the Head of the Office, where the petitioner is working, to the Secretary to Government, Revenue Department. on 13.9.2007. More than one year has elapsed thereafter. Ext.P7 discloses that after the appeal was forwarded to the State Government, the punishment imposed as per Ext.P4 was implemented by lowering the petitioner's rank in the seniority list. Since the petitioner has already invoked the appellate remedy, it would not be proper for this Court to consider the validity of Ext.P4 order, at this stage, in this proceedings. In the appeal evidenced by Ext.P5, petitioner can assail the findings of fact arrived at by the disciplinary authority and seek re- consideration of the matter. This being the situation, I dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the first respondent to consider Ext.P5 W.P.(C) No.27045 of 2008 3 appeal on the merits and pass orders thereon, after notice to and affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. This shall be done within three months from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment. Needless to say, the implementation of punishment imposed as per Ext.P4 will be subject to the orders to be passed by the Appellate authority on Ext.P5 appeal. I further clarify that in the event of Ext.P4 being set aside in appeal, the petitioner will be entitled to restoration of her rank and seniority and consequential benefits. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE nj.