IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 30TH NOVEMBER 2007 / 9TH AGRAHAYANA 1929 WP(C).No. 35458 of 2007(U) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------------- B.S.JAYAKUMAR, AGED 51 YEARS, S/O.BHASKARAN NAIR, AT PRESENT WORKING AS SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, KOZHIKKODE CORPORATION, KOZHIKKODE. BY ADV. SRI.K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI SRI.SAJI SANKARAN NAIR RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, LOCAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, (LSGD), GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. KOZHIKKODE CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KOZHIKKODE. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF URBAN AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE DIRECTOR, VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION BEAURAU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN,SC,KOZHIKODE CORPN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/11/2007 ALONG WITH WPC.NO.35486 OF 2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No. 35458 & 35486 of 2007 -------------------------- Dated this the 30h November, 2007 J U D G M E N T The petitioner in W.P (C ) 35458 of 2007 is working as Superintending Engineer and the petitioner in W.P (C) No.35486 of 2007 is working as Town Planning Officer. Exhibit-P1 memos of charges were issued against the petitioners alleging that by reason of their negligence loss to the tune of Rs.1,25,86,300/- has been caused to the Kozhikode Corporation. Exhibit-P3 reply was submitted by the petitioners. Final order in the disciplinary proceedings was passed by the Government as Exhibit-P4 imposing a punishment of barring of one increment without cumulative effect for three years. The Government also directed under Exhibit-P7 that loss caused to the Corporation be recovered from the officials 2. Petitioners have preferred Exhibit-P5 review petition under the Kerala Civil Service (CC &A) Rules, 1960 before the Government. Pending disposal of the same Exhibit-P6 order has been issued by the Director apparently in consequence of Exhibit-P4. It is in these circumstances that the petitioners have approached this Court. W.P ( C) No. 35458 & 35486 of 2007 2 After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the Corporation, I am of the view that Exhibit-P5 is to be disposed of by the 1st respondent within a time frame. Since Exhibit-P5 invokes statutory powers of the Government, it is appropriate that the enforcement of Exhibit-P6 be subject to the decision to be taken by the Government, on Exhibit-P5. In the result, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Exhibit-P5 in accordance with law, after hearing the petitioners and a representative of the 2nd respondent Corporation within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Enforcement of Exhibit-P6 will be kept in abeyance, pending orders on Exhibit-P5 in the manner aforementioned. The contentions raised by the petitioners as against Exhibit-P6 independent of those taken up in Exhibit-P5 review, are left open and petitioners will be free to agitate the same, if necessary, subsequent to the disposal of Exhibit-P5. (V.GIRI, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 35458 & 35486 of 2007 2 K.THANKAPPAN,J CRL.A. NO.92 OF 1999 W.P ( C) No. 35458 & 35486 of 2007 2 ORDER 25th May, 2007