IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 13TH AUGUST 2010 / 22ND SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 25441 of 2010(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.I.BABY, S/O.ISSAC, SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DISTRICT SPECIAL BRANCH, AYYANTHOLE (P.O), THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN SRI.RAJAN VELLOTH SRI.PRATHAP PILLAI SRI.SAIJO HASSAN SRI.A.S.SABU SRI.BENOJ C AUGUSTIN SRI.RAFEEK. V.K. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPARTMENTAL PROMOTION COMMITTEE FOR PROMOTION TO THE POST OF CIRCLE INSPECTOR, REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. MR.P.NANDAKUMAR, SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------ WP(C) No.25441 of 2010 (E) -------------------------- Dated, this the 13th day of August, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner submits that he is a Sub Inspector of Police. According to the petitioner, on account of pendency of proceedings against him before the Vigilance Tribunal, he was superseded in the matter of promotion to the post of Circle Inspector. It is stated that the proceedings have culminated in Ext.P1 order of punishment dated 17/02/2010, by which 3 increments have been barred with cumulative effect. The petitioner contends that the punishment imposed by Ext.P1 order is only a minor punishment as per the KPDIP Rules and that therefore, his case for promotion is liable to be considered by a review DPC. It is also contended that although he filed repeated representations before the 2nd respondent, the Convener of DPC, so far no positive action has been taken. Therefore, this writ petition has been filed. 2. Barring of 3 increments, as has been ordered in the case of the petitioner by Ext.P1, is only a minor punishment in terms of WP(C) No.25441/2010 -2- the provisions contained in KPDIP Rules. In such a case, the Officer is entitled to be considered for promotion in terms of the provisions contained in Rule 28 of Part-II, KS & SSR and his case is liable to be considered on merits. Therefore, at this stage, what is required to be done is that the 2nd respondent, the Convener of the DPC, has to convene a review DPC and consider the case of the petitioner in the manner as provided in the Rules and take a decision on the claim of the petitioner for promotion. This the 2nd respondent shall do as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg