Kerala High Court
Suresh Kumar A vs Kerala State Road Transport ... on 20 June, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
THURSDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 30TH JYAISHTA, 1946
W.P.(C) NO.35955 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
SURESH KUMAR A, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O.ALBERT,
PAROORVILAKAM PUTHUVEL PUTHEN VEEDU, NEDUVANVILA,
MURIYANKARA DESOM, PARASSALA VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN- 695 502.
BY ADVS.
V.PREMCHAND
SURYA MOHAN P.
FATHIMA SHALU S.
RESPONDENTS:
1 KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION KSRTC,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR,
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT P.O, TRIVANDRUM-695 023.
2 THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR,
KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT P.O, TRIVANDRUM - 695 023.
3 THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR(VIGILANCE),
KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT P.O, TRIVANDRUM -695 023.
4 THE STATION MASTER, KUMILY DEPOT, K.S.R.T.C,
IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN- 685 509.
SC SRI. DEEPU THANKAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
20.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2
WPC. No. 35955/2022
JUDGMENT
(Dated: 20th June, 2024)
The petitioner entered the service of the 1st respondent as a
conductor. While working as Conductor Grade-I, he was suspended from
service on the ground that he was arrayed as an accused in Crime No.306
of 2009 alleging offence under Section 304 B read with 34 IPC, thereafter
he was reinstated in service and was posted at Vikas Bhavan, later he
was transferred to Parassala Depot.
2. The petitioner was convicted and sentenced to undergo
simple imprisonment for 7 years by the Additional Sessions Court,
Neyyattinkara, as per the judgment dated 22.10.2021. The petitioner
challenged the same before this court in Crl. Appeal No.755 of 2021,
and this court, by Ext.P1 order, stayed the sentence and conviction till
the final disposal of the Appeal. The petitioner admits that he was in jail
for 26 days, and as per the orders of this Court, he was released on
bail. In the memo of charge dated 14.09.2009, the petitioner was issued
a re-enquiry report dated 24.03.2022 and directed to submit a reply
within 7 days. The petitioner submitted a reply dated 16.04.2022 before
the 3rd respondent. Meanwhile, the petitioner was transferred from
Parassala Depot to Kumily Depot as per Ext.P4 dated
21.10.2022. Pursuant to the order, he joined the Kumily Depot and
performed his duties from 23.10.2022 to 25.10.2022. On 29.10.2022,
the petitioner was prevented from performing his duty by the Station
Master. At this point, the petitioner approached this court for a direction
to the respondent to permit the petitioner to perform his duty as
Conductor Grade-I in Kumily Depot based on Ext.P4 order. An order was
passed on 15.11.2022, by which it was directed that final orders against
the petitioner in terms of Ext.P5 shall not be issued.
3. Learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents
submits that Ext.P5 is a show cause notice dated 10.10.2022 issued
under Rule 18 (aa) of the KCS (CC&A) Rules by the 3rd respondent to the
petitioner. Ext.P4 is a memorandum dated 21.10.2022 showing the
working arrangement by which the petitioner has been transferred from
Parassala to Kumily, and he joined there. The petitioner was allowed to
work without noticing the facts on Ext.P5.
4. The counsel for the petitioner also submits that he sent a
reply to Ext.P5, but no orders have passed to date because of the stay
order passed by this court. Since Ext.P5 is issued, the respondents are
duty-bound to pass orders based on the reply submitted by the
petitioner.
5. Heard counsel on either side.
6. Since the reply has already been filed, the respondents are
free to proceed with Ext.P5, taking into consideration the reply filed and
passing appropriate orders in accordance with the law.
7. The petitioner was transferred from Parassala to Kumily as
per Ext.P4, and he joined and worked there for 3 days. According to the
petitioner, no other orders were passed, preventing the petitioner from
performing his duties. The respondents do not deny this.
8. Learned standing counsel further submits that the inclusion
of the petitioner by Ext.P4 is only a mistake, which is now sought to be
corrected.
Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the
2nd respondent to take up Ext.P5 notice on the basis of the reply
submitted and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a
period of two weeks from today. Till such time, since no other orders are
issued interdicting the petitioner from performing his duty, he should be
allowed to perform his duty in Kumily depot.
Sd/-
BASANT BALAJI,
JUDGE
ss
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 35955/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 9.6.2022 IN
CRL.APPEAL. NO.755/2021 BEFORE THIS HON'BLE
COURT.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED
26.3.2022 ALONG WITH THE ENQUIRY REPORT DATED
24.3.2022.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED by the
PETITIONER DATED 16.4.2022 BEFORE THE 3RD
RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21.10.2022
PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE
PETITIONER.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED
10.10.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO
THE PETITIONER.
