Indu R vs Kerala State Road Transport ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 11826 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
 WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944
                       WP(C) NO. 38302 OF 2022


PETITIONER:

          INDU R., AGED 51 YEARS, W/O. K.G. SAHUJI,
          CHIEF ENGINEER (UNDER SUSPENSION),
          KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
          CHIEF OFFICE, TRANSPORT BHAVAN,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 023,
          RESIDING AT BRINDA, BNRA-1, BALAVAN NAGAR,
          MANACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 008

          BY ADV K.SANDESH RAJA


RESPONDENTS:

    1     KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
          REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR,
          TRANSPORT BHAVAN, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
          PIN - 695023

    2     THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR
          REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR,
          TRANSPORT BHAVAN, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
          PIN - 695023

    3     THE ENQUIRY AUTHORITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN
          FINANCE ASSISTANT & CHIEF ACCOUNT OFFICER,
          KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
          TRANSPORT BHAVAN, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
          PIN - 695023

          BY ADV DEEPU THANKAN


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
21.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WPC 38302/22
                                       2



                             JUDGMENT

Though there are various allegations, averments and

assertions made and urged in this writ petition, when this matter

was called today, the learned counsel for the petitioner -

Sri.Sandesh Raja and the learned Senior Counsel - Sri.Jaju Babu,

instructed by Sri.Deepu Thankan - learned Standing Counsel for

the KSRTC, submitted that, in order to obtain a quietus to the

rivalry impelled controversies, it will be better that this Court

appoint an Advocate as the Enquiry Officer, to look into the

charges made by the KSRTC against the petitioner.

2. Sri.Sandesh Raja - learned counsel for the petitioner,

submitted that his client is conceding to the afore, on the specific

understanding that the Enquiry Report now settled by the KSRTC

will be withdrawn by them, or set aside by this Court, so that a

de novo enquiry can be conducted by an Advocate of sufficient

experience in labour jurisprudence.

3. Though the parties have left it to this Court to decide

the Enquiry Officer, I am of the view that it will be inappropriate WPC 38302/22

to do so. I am of the firm view that, instead of doing so, it must

be left to the KSRTC to choose the Enquiry Officer appositely, so

that petitioner can then challenge her credentials, if she is so

interested, leading to appropriate remedies being available to her

thereafter.

In the afore circumstances, I order this Writ Petition with

the following directions:

a) I record that the KSRTC has withdrawn Ext.P7(a)

report, as also all consequential proceedings, namely Exts.P10(a)

and P11.

b) I leave liberty to the KSRTC to appoint an Enquiry

Officer, who shall be a practicing Counsel without any

connections whatsoever with them and with at least ten years

practice, preferably in labour jurisprudence.

c) I leave liberty to the petitioner to make an objection

before the KSRTC, if she is to find any reason to do so as regards

the Enquiry Officer appointed; in which event, said Authority will

consider it and issue appropriate orders before moving forward

with the enquiry.

WPC 38302/22

d) The enquiry proceedings as afore authorised, shall be

completed by the KSRTC as expeditiously as is possible, but not

later than five months from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment.

Sd/-

RR                                      DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
                                              JUDGE
 WPC 38302/22


                APPENDIX OF WP(C) 38302/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1          TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER

NO.VLC1/12987/2020 DATED 15.1.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED 23.2.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit3 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 23.2.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.06/FA&CAO/2022 DATED 18.4.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER 27.4.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.06/FA&CAO/2022 DATED 30.4.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM NO.206/GL4/2019/RTC DATED 2.8.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P7 (a) TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILED ENQUIRY REPORT NO.06/FA&CAO/2022 DATED 18.7.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 4.8.2022 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P8(a) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10.8.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.

VLC1/12987/20(GLV) DATED 17.8.2022 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM NO.585/GL9(V)/2022/RTC DATED 8.11.2022 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit10 (a) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.

VLC1/12987/2020 DATED 31.10.2022 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE NO.VLC1/12987/2020 DATED 7.11.2022 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE WPC 38302/22

DEPOSITION OF THE WITNESS.

Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 18/11/2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P14 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 23.11.2022 Exhibit P15 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 24.11.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.