Sunil Joseph vs Kerala State Road Transport ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 18356 Ker

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                      PRESENT
                      THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
         TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 16TH BHADRA, 1943
                             WP(C) NO. 18112 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

              SUNIL JOSEPH
              INSPECTOR, KSRTC,
              PERUMBAVOOR DEPOT,
              ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

              BY ADV K.P.RAJEEVAN



RESPONDENTS:

     1        KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION KSRTC
              REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, TRANSPORT BHAVAN,
              FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN695023.

     2        MANAGING DIRECTOR
              KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
              TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695023.

     3        EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (VIGILANCE)
              KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN,
              FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695023.

     4        ASSISTNAT TRANSPORT OFFICER
              KSRTC, PERUMBAVOOR DEPOT, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-683542.

     5        P.N.SUNIL KUMAR
              ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER,
              KSRTC, PERUMBAVOOR DEPOT,
              PERUMBAVOOR DEPOT, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN-683542.

              BY SHRI.DEEPU THANKAN, SC, KSRTC



     THIS     WRIT    PETITION   (CIVIL)   HAVING   COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
07.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 18112 OF 2021
                                    2



                              JUDGMENT

It is contended that in pursuance to the order dated

11.09.2020 Ext.P3(a), the order initiating disciplinary

proceedings against the petitioner was cancelled. But, however,

the claim with regard to the payment of increment has not been

taken nor the same has been disbursed. Representation dated

23.02.2021 is filed Ext.P6.

2. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that

there shall not be any aversion in taking a call on the

representation.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and

appraised the paper book.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter,

particularly noticing the fact that nothing was found against the

petitioner and the enquiry proceedings had been dropped as the

complaints submitted were on false grounds, and the petitioner

in this regard submitted a representation Ext.P6 for the release of

the increment which was temporarily barred, I direct the 2 nd

respondent to take a call on Ext.P6 in accordance with law, after WP(C) NO. 18112 OF 2021

affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner either through

virtual or physical mode, within a period of 45 days from the date

of receipt of copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of

accordingly.

Sd/-

AMIT RAWAL JUDGE nak WP(C) NO. 18112 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18112/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.VLC.4/38801/16 DATED 12.11.2018 ISSUED BY THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (VIGLANCE).

Exhibit P1(A) A TRUE COPY OF ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P1.

Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 20.12.2019 IN W.P(C) NO.35237 OF 2019.

Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER 3013/GL6/(APL)/2019/RTC DATED 11.09.2020 ISSUED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR (APPELLATE AUTHORITY).

Exhibit P3(A) A TRUE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P3.

Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF CHARGE SHEET NO.VLA.1/11848/17 DATED 15.12.2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P4(A) A TRUE COPY OF ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P4.

Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF DETAILED ENQUIRY REPORT DATED 28.09.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE ENQUIRY OFFICER (ATO), PERINTHALMANNA).

Exhibit P5(A) A TRUE COPY OF ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P5.

Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 23.02.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P6(A) A TRUE COPY OF ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P6.