IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 4TH JANUARY 2008 / 14TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 37563 of 2007(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ SUNIL GEORGE, ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, IRRIGATION SUB DIVISION, MANCOMB, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN SRI.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM) RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-33. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, IRRIGATION AND ADMINISTRATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-33. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BEJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No. 37563 of 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 4th January, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is working as Assistant Executive Engineer in the Irrigation Department. He aspires for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against when he was working as Techinical Assistant as evidenced by Exhibit P1 dated 25.1.2006. Petitioner submitted his written statement of defence to Exhibit P1 on 27.3.2006. The Departmental Promotion Committee was convened for the post of Executive Engineer on 23.11.2007. The Departmental Promotion Committee considered the petitioner's case pursuant to the direction contained in Exhibit P5 judgment. But he was not included in the select list on account of the pendency of the proceedings initiated under Exhibit P6. At this stage, petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to the 2nd respondent to complete the disciplinary proceedings initiated under Exhibit P1, within a time frame. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner Dr. K.P. Satheesan submits that one Sri. Jayaprasad and Smt. Saraswathi Devi who are Assistant Executive Engineers when petitioner was W.P ( C) No. 37563 of 2008 2 Technical Assistant in the execution of the project in Karikode, which is referred to in Exhibit P1 against whom also disciplinary proceedings were initiated have been promoted as Executive Engineers subsequently. He further submits that four other persons who are actually in charge of the work referred to in Exhibit P1 are accused in a vigilance case. Petitioner is not an accused in the vigilance case. After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader also, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to see that the proceedings pursuant to Exhibit P1 are finalised within a period of five months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. (V.GIRI, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 37563 of 2008 2 K.THANKAPPAN,J CRL.A. NO.92 OF 1999 ORDER W.P ( C) No. 37563 of 2008 2 25th May, 2007