IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 15TH JANUARY 2009 / 25TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 36783 of 2008(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- K.SASIDHARAN, (HEAD CONSTABLE Q 5610- RETIRED),RESIDING AT S.S.BHAVAN, PADAVANCODE, VILAPPISALA(P.O),THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.GOPAKUMAR R.THALIYAL SRI.N.P.PRAJEESH RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE RAILWAYS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, CID AND RAILWAYS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No.36783 of 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 15th January,2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner retired from service on 30.11.2007 while working as Head Constable in East Police Station, Kollam. As per Exhibit-P1, after a disciplinary enquiry, he was imposed with punishment of barring three increments with cumulative effect. He filed an appeal before the 4th respondent and was awaiting further action in the matter. Ultimately he came to know that the appeal was disposed of 16 years back. Petitioner therefore filed a review petition before the 4th respondent seeking for a favourable order vacating the punishment. 2. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, learned Government Pleader submitted that the 4th respondent has already disposed the review petition as per Order No.G5/72394/07 dated 28.11.2008. Punishment has been modified as “Increment Bar for three years without cumulative effect”. Therefore, the W.P ( C) No.36783 of 2008 2 writ petition has become infructuous, as the orders under challenge have been modified. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the said order, he is free to approach the appropriate authority. With liberty to do so, the writ petition is closed. (T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No.36783 of 2008 3 W.P ( C) No.36783 of 2008 4