Allowed

K. Abdulla v. the Administrator

Kerala HC20 Nov 2013OP (CAT)/4100/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala, in O.P.(CAT) No. 4100 of 2013, modified the Central Administrative Tribunal's suspension order. The court permitted the petitioner to stay in Kochi during suspension and directed the competent authority to decide on the petitioner's representation within one month.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to be in Kochi during suspension; direction to decide representation within one month.

K. Abdulla Vs the Administrator — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2013/29TH KARTHIKA, 1935 OP (CAT).No. 4100 of 2013 (Z) ------------------------------

¶5

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OA 892/2012 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH DATED 07-11-2013 PETITIONER(S):

¶6

K. ABDULLA, AGED 56 YEARS S/O SYED U.C, HEAD DRAFTSMAN LAKSHADWEEP PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT WILLINGDON ISLAND, KOCHI 3 RESIDING AT GOVERNMENT QUARTERS NO C-2 PANAMPILLY NATGAR, KOCHI 682036

¶7

BY ADVS.SRI.T.C.GOVINDA SWAMY SMT.KALA T.GOPI

¶8

RESPONDENT(S):

¶9

THE ADMINISTRATOR, LAKSHADWEEP ADMINISTRATION UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP, KAVARTTI 682555

¶10

THE SECRETARY (WORKS), PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP, KAVARATTI 682555

¶11

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, LAKSHADWWEP PUBLIC WORKS DEAPRTMENT DIVISION INDIRA GANDHI ROAD, WILLINGDON ISLAND, KOCHI 682003

¶12

THE SUPERINTENDING ENTINEER, LAKSHADWEEP PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ADMINISTRATION OF THE UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP. KAVARATTI 682555

¶13

R1,2,3,4 BY ADV. SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,SC,LAKSHADWEEP ADMN

¶14

THIS OP (CAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-11-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

OP (CAT).No. 4100 of 2013 (Z) ------------------------------

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶18

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN OA 892 OF 2012 DATED 7TH NOVEMBER 2013 RENDERED BY THE HON'BLE CAT, ERNAKULAM BENCH

¶19

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE OA NO 892 OF 2012 DATED 06-10-2012 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH

¶20

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT FILED ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS DATED 06-02-2013

¶21

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 09-11-2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, ADMINISTRATION, UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP

¶22

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

¶23

// TRUE COPY //

¶24

P.S. TO JUDGE

¶25

T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & B. KEMAL PASHA, JJ.

¶26

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

¶27

O.P.(CAT) No. 4100 of 2013

¶28

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

¶29

DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2013

¶30

JUDGMENT

¶31

Ramachandran Nair, J.

¶32

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, produced as Ext.P1. This is a matter where the petitioner was placed under suspension as per Annexure A1 order produced before the Tribunal. In the latter part of the said order, it is stipulated that during the period of suspension the petitioner shall not leave the headquarters without obtaining the previous permission of the officer who signed the order.

¶33

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Govindaswamy that with regard to the said aspect the petitioner has already filed a representation as Ext.P4, but no directions have been issued by the Tribunal to consider the said representation.

¶34

We heard learned Standing Counsel for the Lakshadweep Administration, Shri S. Radhakrishnan. It is submitted that Ext.P4 representation can be disposed of within one month.

¶35

OP(CAT)No.4100/2013

¶36

-2-

¶37

Learned counsel for the petitioner further prayed that during the

¶38

said period he may be allowed to be in Kochi itself. We permit the petitioner to be in Kochi during the said period.

¶39

We direct the competent authority among the respondents to take a

¶40

decision on Ext.P4 within a period of one month from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment. Ext.P1 order passed by the Tribunal is modified to the above extent.

¶41

The original petition is disposed of as above. No costs.

¶42

(T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE)

¶43

(B. KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE)

¶44

kav/

K. Abdulla v. the Administrator

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K. Abdulla v. the Administrator

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

Alimon Vs M.Prabhakaran

Kunnicheri Koran Vs Thalichalath Mundakundil Kunhamina

Chakkunny Vs Anto Thomas

State of Kerala Vs Travancore Devaswom Board

The Travancore Devaswom Board Vs the Deputy Examiner, Local Fund Audit

M.C.George Vs Subrahmanyan