IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2011 / 26TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 10323 of 2011(M) -------------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- G.UNNIKRISHNAN,AGED4 43 YEARS, S/O.G.GANGADHARAN THAMPI,ASST.GENERAL MANAGER (UNDER DISMISSAL),KERALA STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD,KESTON ROAD,KOWDIAR, TRIVANDRUM-695 003.(RESIDING AT FLAT NO. 1C-B',CANTI SELESTIAL JAWAHAR NAGAR,TRIVANDRUM-695 003. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,KESTON ROAD,KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003,REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,THE KERALA STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, KESTON ROAD,KOWDIAR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003. 3. THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN,THE KERALA STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,KESTON ROAD, KOWDIAR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003. ADV. SRI.M.PATHROSE MATTHAI, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R1-R3 SRI.SAJI VARGHESE FOR R1-R3 SMT.MARIAM MATHAI FOR R1-R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.10323/2011 2: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO NO.E-346/1912 DATED 07.09.2010 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO OF CHARGES NO. KSIDC/E-346/3245 DATED 03.01.2011. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 04.03.2011. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL //True Copy// P.A to Judge. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.10323 Of 2011 -------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 16th DAY OF JUNE, 2011 J U D G M E N T Aggrieved by the punishment imposed upon the petitioner in a disciplinary action, namely by Exhibit P4 order, this Writ Petition has been filed. The petitioner who was working as Assistant General Manager has been dismissed from service, which is under challenge in this Writ Petition. 2. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner has already filed an appeal before the 3rd respondent and the appeal is yet to be disposed of. 3. Therefore, there will be a direction to the respondents to take a decision in the appeal without delay. It is pointed out that the decision will have to be taken in the meeting of the 3rd respondent, the Board Directors of the Company. Therefore, the appeal will be taken up for hearing preferably in the next meeting of the Board and a decision will be taken after hearing the petitioner also. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. SD/-(T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) dsn