Disposed

Sunil S. v. the State of Kerala and Others

Kerala HC17 Feb 2010WP(C)/5147/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a suspended accountant challenging his suspension. It directed the first respondent to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's review petition within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the first respondent to consider and pass orders on the review petition (Ext.P8) within three weeks. Writ Petition disposed of.

Sunil S. Vs the State of Kerala and Others — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 28TH MAGHA 1931

¶4

WP(C).No. 5147 of 2010(P)

PETITIONER(S):

SUNIL.S. S/O. C.SADANANDAN, AGED 42 YEARS, ACCOUNTANT(UNDER SUSPENSION), THVANNUR GRMA PANCHAYATH (RESIDING AT MARUTHA MANDIRAM, ERUNNOOTTIL, P.O.VATTATHAMAR, KADAKKAL-KOLLAM DISTRICT-691536).

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.K.E.HAMZA

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

¶12

THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶13

THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATHS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶14

THE CHIEF ENGINEER, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT SECTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶15

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT SECTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶16

THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT SECTION, KALLARA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶17

THE SECRETARY, KALLARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶18

BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. ANU SIVARAMAN -R1 TO R5

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.

¶21

W.P.(C) NO. 5147 OF 2010

¶22

Dated this the 17^th day of February, 2010

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

The petitioner is presently working as Accountant in Thavannur Grama Panchayat, Malappuram District. As per Ext.P1 order dated 7.1.2010, he was placed under suspension in connection with the grant of tender to one Ramakrishna Pillai for construction of the office building of Kallara Grama Panchayat. The specific grounds on which the petitioner assail Ext.P1 are grounds (e) and (f) in the Writ Petition, which read thus:

¶25

“(e) It is submitted that while the decision No.1 (2) of Kallara Grama Panchayath dated 31-10-2008, granting prayer of Sri. Ramakrishna Pillai for market value of the cement and steel was taken, petitioner had no role over the process of decision.

¶26

(f) It is the committee which approved the tender. It is for the Committee to decide whether a negotiation is required or not. Petitioner had no role in the said matter.”

¶27

Raising the said grounds, the petitioner has already approached

¶28

W.P.(C) NO. 5147/2010

¶29

¶30

the Government by filing Ext.P8 Review Petition. Ext.P8 is a statutory Review Petition and, therefore, the first respondent is bound to consider the same. Hence, there will be a direction to the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P8 as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of three weeks from today.

¶31

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

¶32

(C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE)

¶33

sp/

¶34

W.P.(C) NO. 5147/2010

¶35

¶36

C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.

¶37

W.P.(C) NO. 5147/2010

¶38

JUDGMENT

¶39

17^th February, 2010

Sunil S. v. the State of Kerala and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil S. v. the State of Kerala and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.v.Gopalan Vs State of Kerala & Others

C.K.Muraleedharan Vs State Warehousing Corporation and Anr.

R.Rajesh Vs State of Kerala and Others

Yeorge Fernandez Vs Corproate Manager

Ms.Beegum Sofia Vs Kerala Public Service Commission

D.Suthan Vs North Paravur Municipality