IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH MARCH 2008 / 29TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 9260 of 2008(B) PETITIONER: DHARMARAJAN, MANGALYA, NEAR VETTUROAD LEVEL CROSS, KARIYIL, KAZHAKUTTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, (RETIRED CHIEF ENGINEER, IRRIGATION AND ADMINISTRATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.SREEDHARAN NAIR SRI.V.VARGHESE RESPONDENTS: 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME AND VIGILANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (IRRIGATION & ADMINISTRATION), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BEJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C).No.9260 of 2008 ------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of March, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner, while working as Executive Engineer in the Irrigation Department, Thiruvananthapuram, was placed under suspension consequent upon the registration of a vigilance case (C.C.NO.1/93) against him for offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, read with Section 120 B of the Indian Penal Code. He was suspended as per Ext.P1 order dated 31.07.1996. Pursuant to the judgment of a Division Bench of this court in W.A.No.1390/06, the petitioner was reinstated in service as per Government Order dated 19.6.1997. Based on Ext.P2, the petitioner rejoined duty on 1.8.1997. The vigilance case was charge sheeted and the petitioner was tried and convicted. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/-. 2. The petitioner challenged the conviction in Crl.A.No.388/97 by Ext.P6 judgment dated 12.10.1996. The petitioner's appeal was allowed and the conviction and sentence were set aside. Thereupon the petitioner moved the Government vide Ext.P7 representation for revocation of the W.P.(C).NO.9260/08 :: 2 :: dismissal order and for treating the period of his absence from duty with all consequential service benefits including the pay and allowances. Ext.P7 was submitted on 7.3.2007. By Ext.P8 communication, the Government informed the Chief Engineer, under a copy to the petitioner, that the Government intends to file an appeal before the Supreme Court against Ext.P6 judgment and therefore, a decision on the representation can be taken only after disposal of the case by the Supreme Court. Ext.P8 has been challenged in this writ petition. 3. In my view, the stand taken in Ext.P8 is not sustainable. Ext.P6 judgment is dated 12.10.2006 and it is, therefore, more than 16 months since the judgment was delivered. This is time enough to move the Supreme Court. It is not clear even from Ext.P8 that the appeal has actually been filed before the Supreme Court. The fate of the Special Leave Petition, if any, is also not clear. As matters stand at present, the petitioner has been acquitted in the criminal case and therefore, the Government is bound to pass orders as regards the period of absence from 1996 to the date on which the petitioner would have normally retired on superannuation, had W.P.(C).NO.9260/08 :: 3 :: he been in service. The petitioner is now aged 59 years. The Government is bound to pass an order in terms of Rule 56B of Part I of the Kerala Service Rules. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to pass orders on Ext.P7, keeping in mind Rule 18 of the Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeals) Rules and Rule 56 B of Part I of the Kerala Service Rules, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. This shall be done without reference to Ext.P8. Sd/- (V.GIRI) JUDGE sk/ //true copy// P.S. To Judge