IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH OCTOBER 2008 / 7TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 30992 of 2008(M) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- P.RADHAKRISHNAN, FORMERLY VILLAGE OFFICER, MALAYALAPPUZHA VILLAGE, RESIDING AT PALLICKA VEEDU, KAIPPATTOOR.P.O, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.B.RAMAN PILLAI SRI.R.ANIL SRI.SUJESH MENON V.B. SRI.JOSEPH P.ALEX SRI.SHYAM ARAVIND RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.OF KERALA, REVENUE DEPARTMENT. 2. THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PATHANAMTHITTA. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN FOR R1 TO R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Rs/ P.N.Ravindran, J. ===================== W.P(C).No.30992 of 2008 ===================== Dated this the 29th day of October, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner was convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- by the Court of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Thiruvananthapuram for offences punishable under Sections 7, 13(2) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Following his conviction, he was dismissed from service invoking Rule 18 of the Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1960, hereinafter referred to as the “Rules” for short, by Ext.P2 order dated 16.1.2001. The dismissal was with effect from 24.9.1997, the date on which he was placed under suspension following his arrest. The petitioner challenged the judgment of conviction and sentence in Criminal Appeal No.651 of 2000 in this Court. By Ext.P3 judgment delivered on 20.2.2008, the judgment of conviction and sentence was set aside and the petitioner was acquitted. It was held that the prosecution has miserably failed to establish the guilt of the petitioner. Pursuant to Ext.P3 judgment, the petitioner moved the Land Revenue Commissioner, Thiruvananthapuram and the District Collector, Pathanamthitta in Exts.P4 and P5 representations seeking reinstatement in service. The petitioner's grievance is that though more than 8 months have passed after Ext.P3 judgment was delivered, the WP(C) 30992/08 -: 2 :- respondents have not reinstated him in service in terms of Rule 18 of the Rules. 2. The petitioner, who will attain the age of superannuation on 31.12.2008 has in this Writ Petition prayed for the following reliefs: “i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of mandamus commanding the respondents 2 and 3 to act in terms of Clause (b) of second Proviso to Rule 18 of the Kerala Civil Service (CC & A) Rules 1960 and reinstate the petitioner forthwith with all consequential benefits. ii. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of mandamus commanding the respondents 2 and 3 to consider and pass orders on Exhibits P4 and P5 representations forthwith. iii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of certiorari calling for records leading to Exhibit P5 and quash Exhibits P1 and P2 orders. iv. issue a writ, order or direction declaring that the petitioner is continuing in service from his date of suspension and is entitled for all benefits as if he was continuing in service.” 3. On the terms of Rule 18 of the Rules, the petitioner was dismissed from service following his conviction. Now that the judgment of conviction has been set aside by this Court on appeal, the order dismissing the petitioner from service is liable to be revised and the petitioner reinstated in service in terms of Clause (b) of the second proviso to Rule 18 of the Rules. The petitioner was working as Village Officer when he was arrested, suspended and later dismissed from WP(C) 30992/08 -: 3 :- service by the District Collector. In the light of the stipulation in Rule 18 of the Rules referred to above, the respondents are bound to revise Ext.P2 and reinstate the petitioner in service. Since the petitioner is due to retire on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.12.2008, it is necessary that orders are passed before the said date, revoking the order of dismissal. 4. In these circumstances, I dispose of this Writ Petition with a direction to the Land Revenue Commissioner to issue necessary orders on Ext.P4 representation within two weeks from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ess 30/10