IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 28TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 30548 of 2008(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- V.N.CHANDRASEKHARAN ASST.SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, (GRADE G.705), NEDUMKANDOM POLICE STATION IDUKKI. BY ADV. SRI.SIVAN MADATHIL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM ZONE, ERNAKULAM. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, IDUKKI DIST. 3. DY.SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 4. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ADIMALY POLICE STATION, IDUKKI. 5. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE SANTHANPARA POLICE STATION 6. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT.PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ====================================== W.P.(C)No. 30548 of 2008 ====================================== Dated this the 27th day of November 2008 JUDGMENT Heard Sri.Sivan Madathil, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Anu Sivaraman, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner is presently working as Assistant Sub Inspector of Police. He was subjected to disciplinary action. By Ext.P7 order passed on 12.3.2007, the Superintendent of Police, Idukki District imposed on him the punishment of barring of one increment without cumulative effect. Aggrieved by Ext.P7, the petitioner filed Ext.P8 appeal before the Inspector General of Police, Ernakulam Zone. By Ext.P9 order passed on 18.7.2007, the said appeal was rejected. The petitioner submits that aggrieved by Exts.P7 and P9 orders, he has moved the Secretary to Government, Department of Home Affairs under Rule 36A of the Kerala Police Departmental Inquiries, Punishment and Appeal Rules, 1958, by submitting Ext.P11 review petition. 3. Though the petitioner has challenged Exts.P7 and P9 orders and has also prayed for consequential reliefs, when the writ petition came up for hearing today, Sri.Sivan Madathil, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that W.P.(C)No.30548/2008 2 leaving open the petitioner's contentions on the merits, the Secretary to Government, Department of Home Affairs may be directed to consider Ext.P11 review petition and take a decision thereon, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. 4. Rule 36A of the Kerala Police Departmental Inquiries, Punishment and Appeal Rules, 1958 empowers the petitioner to move the Government seeking a review of the orders passed by the disciplinary authority and the appellate authority. Since the petitioner has invoked a statutory remedy available to him, by submitting Ext.P11 representation before the Secretary to Government, Department of Home Affairs, that the authority is bound to consider the same and take a decision thereon. 5. In these circumstances, leaving open the petitioner's contentions, I dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the Secretary to Government, Department of Home Affairs to consider Ext.P11 review petition and pass orders thereon, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. This shall be done within a period of three months from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment. It is clarified that I have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the contentions put forward by the petitioner. It is also clarified W.P.(C)No.30548/2008 3 that if the petitioner is exonerated by the Government, his claim for promotion to the category of Sub Inspector of Police shall also be considered by the competent authority. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE css/