Kerala High Court
R.Shaji vs The Kerala State Road Transport ... on 27 January, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
THURSDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 7TH MAGHA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 2654 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
R.SHAJI
AGED 48 YEARS
S/O. RAJAPPAN,
DRIVER, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
CHERTHALA DEPOT
(RESIDING AT CHERIYATHUMTHARA,
THANNEERMUKKAM P.O, CHERTHALA-688 527)
BY ADVS.
JUSTINE .K.P.
A.JOSEPH GEORGE
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, EAST FORT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 023
2 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, EAST FORT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 023
3 THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (VIGILANCE),
THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, EAST FORT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 023
4 THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION),
THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, EAST FORT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 023
5 THE ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER,
THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
WP(C) NO. 2654 OF 2022
2
CHERTHALA DEPOT - 688524.
SRI ALEX ANTONY, SC
SRI. DEEPU THANKAN, SC FOR KSRTC.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 2654 OF 2022
3
JUDGMENT
The petitioner states that he is working as a driver in the Cherthala Depot
of the 1st respondent Corporation. He claims that he had joined service of the
Corporation in the year 2008.
2. According to the petitioner, for absenting from service, disciplinary
proceedings were initiated against him and an enquiry was conducted. Ext.P6 is
the report of enquiry recommending strict action. He was issued with Ext.P7
memorandum on 23.11.2021 to which he submitted his explanation. According
to the petitioner, nothing further has transpired since then. It is contended that
before submission of the enquiry report, the petitioner had submitted Ext.P8
representation on 4.9.2020 requesting that he be readmitted in service. He
contends that Ext.P8 representation has not been taken up or considered to
date. It is in the aforesaid backdrop, the petitioner is before this Court seeking
directions to the respondents to readmit the service by considering Ext.P8
representation.
3. I have heard Sri. Justine K.P, the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and Sri. Alex Antony, the learned counsel appearing for the
WP(C) NO. 2654 OF 2022
Corporation. It is submitted by Sri. Justine that the limited request of the
petitioner is for a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P8 and take a
decision. Sri. Alex Antony, the learned standing counsel submitted that pursuant
to Ext.P8, Ext.P6 enquiry report was received and Ext.P7 memorandum has been
issued to the petitioner. It is submitted that appropriate action shall be taken
after considering the explanation offered by the petitioner. It is further submitted
that Ext.P8 is pending before the 3rd respondent and there is no impediment in
considering the same, if a request is made before the 2nd respondent.
4. After having carefully evaluated the contentions raised in this writ
petition, the submissions made across the Bar and the facts and circumstances, I
am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of by issuing the following
directions:
a) There will be a direction to the petitioner to submit Ext.P8 before
the 2nd respondent within a period of two weeks from today. If the
same is submitted as directed, the 2nd respondent shall take up the
representation and take a decision, as per procedure and in
accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of being heard,
either physically or virtually, to the petitioner herein or his authorised
representative.
WP(C) NO. 2654 OF 2022
b) A decision shall be taken, as directed above, within a period of two
months from the date of submission of Ext.P8 before the 2nd
respondent.
c) It would be open to the petitioner to produce a copy of the writ
petition along with the judgment before the concerned respondent
for further action.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V,
JUDGE
IAP
WP(C) NO. 2654 OF 2022
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2654/2022
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY
DR DEEVAR PRAHLAD OF TALUK HEADQUARTERS
HOSPITAL, CHERTHALA, DATED 5-11-2017
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DATED
18-05-2018 ISSUED BY DR T. SHANKER PRASANTH OF
ILLAM AYUR HERITAGE
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY
DR M. PARAMESWARA SARMA DATED 19-05-2018
Exhibit P3A TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY
DR. M. PARAMESWARA SARMA DATED 7-08-2018
Exhibit P3B TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY
DR. M. PARAMESWARA SARMA DATED 1-11-2018
Exhibit P3C TUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY
DR. M. PARAMESWARA SARMA DATED 21-1-2019
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE FITNESS CERTIFICATE DATED
25-3-2019
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. PL2/787/18/CHLA
DATED 8-3-2018
Exhibit P5A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. PL2/787/18/CHLA
DATED 24-08-2020
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILED ENQUIRY REPORT DATED
1-11-2021
WP(C) NO. 2654 OF 2022
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM VIDE NO
VLE4/26929/2020 DATED 23-11-2021
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 4-09-2020
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:
NIL
