Disposed

State of Kerala v. T.N.Vinod Kumar

Kerala HC15 Nov 2012RP/390/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The review petitioners argued that parallel criminal proceedings barred the disciplinary inquiry mandated by a prior writ order. Finding the criminal case quashed due to lack of sanction, the Court directed the disciplinary proceedings to be completed within three months. Review petition disposed.

What did the court decide?

Directs disciplinary proceedings to be completed within three months from the date of receipt of this judgment.

State of Kerala Vs T.N.Vinod Kumar — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012/24TH KARTHIKA 1934

¶5

RP.No. 390 of 2007 (I)

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC.27382/2006 DATED 06-11-2006

¶7

REVIEW PETITIONERS / RESPONDENTS :

¶8

1. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,

¶9

POLICE HEADQUARTERS, TRIVANDRUM.

¶10

2. COMMANDANT, KAP 3 BATTALION, ADOOR.

¶11

BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. M.J. RAJASREE

¶12

RESPONDENT / PETITIONER :

¶13

T.N.VINODKUMAR S/O. NANU T.K., AGED 48 YEARS, CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CB CID, KOTTAYAM.

¶14

BY ADV. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR

¶15

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15-11-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶18

R.P. No. 390 of 2007

¶19

Dated this the 15^th day of November, 2012

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The petitioner in the writ petition while working as a Circle Inspector of Police, got involved in some alleged misconduct, which led to the disciplinary proceedings against him, based on Ext.P2 memo of charges dated 19.1.2005. This was under challenge in W.P.(C).No.27382/2006. After getting instructions, it was submitted by the learned Government Pleader that the proceedings would be finalized within 'three months', which in turn was recorded and the matter was disposed of with a direction to finalize the disciplinary proceedings within three months. It is now brought to the notice of this Court by the review petitioners, i.e., the respondents in the writ petition, that the alleged misconduct was also the subject matter of a criminal case and by virtue of the statutory bar under Rule 10(a) of Kerala Police Departmental Inquiry, Punishment and Appeal Rules, 1958, there cannot be any parallel proceedings. They are aggrieved particularly in view of the 'time frame' stipulated by this Court to complete the proceedings and hence the review petition.

¶22

R.P. No. 390 of 2007 -2-

¶23

Sri. S. Sreekumar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent in the review petition (Writ petitioner) submits that, the writ petitioner who was shown as the accused in the criminal case has been discharged by virtue of setting aside the charge for the reason that, there was no requisite sanction for prosecuting the writ petitioner. This being the position, there cannot be any further delay in the matter on finalizing the disciplinary proceedings.

¶24

After hearing both the sides, this Court finds that, the pendency of the criminal case cannot be pressed into service any further by the review petitioners under the changed circumstances. The disciplinary proceedings against the writ petitioner shall be taken to a logical conclusion by completing the said proceedings at the earliest, at any rate within 'three months' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶25

Review petition is disposed of.

¶26

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.

¶27

Kp/-

State of Kerala v. T.N.Vinod Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Kerala v. T.N.Vinod Kumar

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

T.P.Abdul Hakkim and Others Vs State of Kerala and Others

M. Noorjahan Vs Municipal Secretary

Seena K Vs Kerala State Electricity Board

Priya.P.R Vs Government of Kerala

Madhusoodhanan Asari Vs State of Kerala

Vinod .v.v Vs Sbt