IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2010 / 24TH POUSHA 1931 RP.No. 1148 of 2009(E) ---------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.12643/2008 Dated 25/03/2009 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): RESPONDENTS --------------------------------- 1. TAHSILDAR, MUKUNDAPURAM. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR. 3. COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SHRI P.N.SANTHOSH RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------- PAREED A.K., VILLAGE OFFICER (UNDER SUSPENSION), VADAKKUMKARA VILLAGE, RESIDING AT ALANGATTU HOUSE, MALA P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ R.P. No.1148/2009 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 14th day of January, 2010 O R D E R Heard the learned Government Pleader appearing for the review petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent herein. W.P.(C).No.12643/2008 was disposed of on 25/03/2009, directing the District Collector to finalise the disciplinary proceedings and pass orders after complying with all the formalities within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the Judgment. In the review petition, it is pointed out that the Principal Secretary, Revenue Department issued letter dated 21/10/2009 to the District Collector, informing that a Vigilance case is pending against the petitioner in respect of the same matter. Annexure-I is the copy of the said Government letter, dated 21/10/2009. It is also stated therein that at the time of pronouncing the Judgment, the matter was not referred to the Vigilance Department. Subsequently, the same was ordered. It is further submitted by the learned Government Pleader that as per para 13 of G.O.(P).No.65/92/Vig., dated 12/05/1992, when an investigation/enquiry against the Government servants is pending in the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau, the Head of Department/Office concerned shall not R.P. No.1148/2009 -:2:- initiate a parallel departmental enquiry on the same allegation, but shall wait for the completion of the investigation/enquiry by the Director of Vigilance & Anti- Corruption Bureau. A copy of the said Government Order is produced as Annexure-II. By Annexure-III, the same has been reiterated. It is in these circumstances, the review petition has been filed. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that this is a subsequent development and, therefore, there are no grounds to review the Judgment. It is pointed out that the delay in the matter has been taken note of while directing completion of the disciplinary enquiry. 3. The fact that the Vigilance case is pending against the petitioner cannot be disputed. In that view of the matter, I find that the ground shown in the review petition is only reasonable and justifiable. But, still there should be a time frame for the completion of the vigilance enquiry also. Therefore, the review petition is disposed of with the following directions. The Vigilance enquiry initiated against the petitioner will be expedited and it will be completed, at any rate, within eight months from today. Depending upon the outcome, the disciplinary proceedings will also be finalised without R.P. No.1148/2009 -:3:- further delay. The Judgment rendered in the writ petition will stand modified to the above extent. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms