Parties in these four writ petitions are the same. The subject matters in these writ petitions are interconnected also. Therefore, as agreed to by the parties, these writ petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment.

2. The petitioner, the same in all these writ petitions, is an Executive Engineer in the services of the Kerala State Warehousing Corporation, the 1st respondent herein, which is a statutory Corporation owned by the State of Kerala incorporated under the Warehousing Corporation Act, 1962 of which the 2nd respondent is the present Managing Director who is impleaded in his personal capacity as allegations of mala fides are raised against him. W.P.(C) Nos.37287/2003, 20554 and 28326 of 2004 relate to disciplinary proceedings on three separate memo of charges against the petitioner and W.P.(C) No.14851/2004 relates to his transfer and non-sanction of increments. It is necessary to narrate here some history also since W.P.(C) No.37287/2003 was once disposed of by a learned Single Judge and later a learned Division Bench set aside the Judgment of the learned single judge and remanded the same for fresh consideration on merits.

3. W.P.(C) No.37287/2003 was filed challenging the punishment of reduction to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer for a period of two years, imposed on the petitioner by Ext.P15 order dated 11-11-2003 passed by the Managing Director of the 1st respondent. The same was once disposed of by a learned Single Judge by judgment dated 26-11-2003 directing the petitioner to exhaust the statutory remedy by way of appeal available to him without considering the writ petition on merits. The petitioner challenged the same by filing W.A.No.2084 of 2003 which was disposed of by a Division Bench by the judgment dated 30-9-2004, in which it was held as follows:-

“Since we are inclined to remit the case back to the learned single judge in the light of the subsequent developments that have taken place, it is not necessary for us to state the facts giving rise ton this Writ Appeal. Suffice to mention that disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the appellant, who was served with a memo of charges and departmental enquiry was held against him. Charges are said to have been proved on the basis of which the Managing Director by his communication dated 11-11-2003 reverted the appellant from the post of Executive Engineer to that of Assistant Executive Engineer for a period of two years with effect from the date of the communication. It was against this order that the appellant filed W.P.(C) No.37287 o 2003 in this court making serious allegations of mala fides against the second respondent, who is the managing Director of the kerala State warehousing Corporation. The learned single Judge did not examine the allegations of malafides and without obtaining the comments or counter affidavits of the respondents in the Writ petition, disposed of the same by relegating the appellant to pursue the remedy of appeal before the Board of Directors. It is alleged that the remedy of appeal in the circumstances of the case is not efficacious.

2. We are informed that subsequent to the passing of the order dated 11-11-2003, the appellant was served with two more charge sheets and disciplinary proceedings have been initiated against him and that he has challenged those proceedings in two separate Writ Petitions, which are pending before the learned single judge. Learned counsel for the appellant states that those disciplinary proceedings have also been challenged on the ground of mala fides. Since the learned single Judge hearing those petitions is likely to examine the issues raised in those petitions and also the allegations of mala fides, we think it necessary that this case be also remitted back to the learned single Judge for a decision on merits so that the allegations of mala fides could be examined comprehensively. We are adopting this court, because the learned single Judge, w