IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 14TH OCTOBER 2008 / 22ND ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 29746 of 2008(N) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------------- M.VIJAYAN., FORESTER (NOW ON TRAINING) KERALA FOREST SCHOOL, ARIPPA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.K.E.HAMZA RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FOREST AND WILDLIFE(A) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS (ADMINISTRATION), TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (PROJECT TIGER) PERIYAR WEST DIVISION, PEERUMEDU. 4. THE FIELD DIRECTOR, PROJECT TIGER, KOTTAYAM. 5. THE CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, CENTRAL CIRCLE , THRISSUR. 6. THE SECRETARY, BLOCK PANCHAYATH, KANJIRAPPALLY. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ====================================== W.P.(C)No.29746 of 2008 ====================================== Dated this the 14th day of October 2008 JUDGMENT Heard Sri.V.A.Muhammed, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Anu Sivaraman, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner challenges Ext.P1 order of suspension passed by the fourth respondent. By Ext.P1 order passed on 16.9.2008, the fourth respondent placed the petitioner under suspension on the ground that he along with another person had misappropriated government funds while he was the Ex-officio Secretary of Kuzhimavu 1 Eco Development Committee. The petitioner submits that he was associated with the said Committee only from 1.10.2001 and that the work in question was executed prior to his taking charge as the Ex-officio Secretary of the said Committee. The petitioner submits relying on the decision of this Court in Surenderan v Government of Kerala [ILR 2008(3) 587] that the order of suspension is liable to be set aside. 2. The Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeals) Rules, 1960 confers on the petitioner the right to challenge Ext.P1 order of suspension in appeal before the authority to which the authority which passed the order of suspension is subordinate. The petitioner has thus an effective alternate remedy. As a matter of fact, the petitioner has filed W.P.(C)29746/2008 2 Ext.P11 appeal before the second respondent. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent submits that the said appeal has been received by the second respondent. In these circumstances, I dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the second respondent to consider Ext.P11 appeal on the merits and take a decision thereon after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. This shall be done within one month from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment. I make it clear that I have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's contentions. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is presently attending training in the Forest Training College at Aripra in Thiruvananthapuram District and that notwithstanding the order of suspension, the petitioner may be permitted to continue to attend and complete the training. This is also a matter which can considered by the second respondent while disposing of the appeal. The second respondent shall on the petitioner filing a representation in that regard within two weeks from today, consider the said request as well and pass orders thereon while passing orders on Ext.P11 appeal. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE css/