IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 17TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 28TH MAGHA 1930 WA.No. 369 of 2009() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.369/2009 Dated 28/01/2009 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ M.S.CHANDRAVALLY, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O.HARIHARAN, THIRUVONAM, THATHAMPALLY P.O., ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW JAMES RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4 & ADDL.RESPONDENT NO.5 -------------------------------------------------------- 1. DEPUTY SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF PANCHAYATH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH, ALAPPUZHA. 4. SECRETARY, PULINKUNNU GRAMA PANCHAYATH, ALAPPUZHA. 5. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM GOVT.PLEADER SRI.BENNY GERVASIS THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- W.A. No.369 of 2009 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 17th February, 2009. J U D G M E N T Kurian Joseph, J. Appellant is the writ petitioner. The writ petition was filed challenging Ext.P1 order of suspension. According to the petitioner, the suspension is totally without any justification. Some of the relevant materials to substantiate her contentions are produced in the writ petition as well as in the writ appeal. Once the order of suspension is issued, Rule 10(6) of the Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules provides for an opportunity to the incumbent concerned to seek a review of the order, and apparently as per Ext.P5, the petitioner has resorted to such remedy. There was also a prayer in the writ petition to consider Ext.P5. Learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition with a direction to pass orders on Ext.P5 within two months. The petitioner submits that this court should have WA NO.369/09 2 interfered with the suspension since there is no material available for the additional 5th respondent to place the petitioner under suspension. So long as the rules provide for an opportunity for the incumbent concerned to approach the authority which placed him under suspension, to bring such materials before the said authority so as to revoke the suspension, the court is fully justified in issuing such a direction to pass orders on the review petition. All the materials produced by the petitioner are to be produced by him before the additional 5th respondent, the authority who placed him under suspension. Learned Government Pleader submits that in case those materials are produced by the petitioner before the additional 5th respondent and in case he appears before the additional 5th respondent, orders can be passed expeditiously, after hearing the petitioner. In the above circumstances, the writ appeal is disposed of as follows :- The petitioner may present herself before the additional 5th respondent with all the relevant materials, on 27.2.2009. The additional 5th respondent shall afford an WA NO.369/09 3 opportunity for hearing to the petitioner and thereafter pass orders on Ext.P5 within another three weeks. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. tgs KURIAN JOSEPH & S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JJ ---------------------------------------------- W.A. No.369 of 2009 ---------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T Dated 17th February, 2009.