IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 4TH JANUARY 2010 / 14TH POUSHA 1931 RP.No. 1049 of 2009() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WA.1401/2009 Dated 06/08/2009 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- C.B.PREETHI, U.D.CLERK, COLLECTORATE, MALAPPURAM (UNDER ORDER OF SUSPENSION) RESIDING AT NANDANAM THIRUVEGAPPURA, PATTAMBI NOW WORKING AT OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) CIVIL STATION, KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.V.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1.THE COMMISSIONER FOR LAND REVENUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.BENNY GERVASIS. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON ON 04/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- R.P.No.1049/2009 in W.A. No.1401 of 2009 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 4th January, 2010. O R D E R Balakrishnan Nair, J. The direction in paragraph 4 of the judgment under review that the period from 1.11.2006 to 7.12.2007 will be treated as suspension for the time being for the purpose of releasing the service benefits like increment, pay revision arrears etc. to the review petitioner/respondent and also the direction to the competent authority to review the matter after the culmination of the criminal proceedings, are under challenge in this review petition. 2. As far as the treating of suspension period is concerned, according to the review petitioner, essentially it is a matter for the Government to decide under Rule 56B of Part I Kerala Service Rules, at the first instance. So, she prays for vacating that direction and giving her liberty to pursue the matter before the Government. 3. We heard the learned Government Pleader on this point. We feel that it is not necessary for this court to order how the aforementioned period should be treated. It is a matter for R.P.No.1049/2009 in W.A. No.1401 of 2009 2 the Government to decide at the first instance. Accordingly, the aforementioned directions in paragraph 4 of the judgment are recalled. The petitioner will be free to move the Government for appropriate reliefs. Her contentions are kept open. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE. tgs K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- R.P.No.1049/2009 in W.A. No.1401 of 2009 ---------------------------------------------- O R D E R Dated 4th January, 2010.