Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ALEXANDER THOMAS, K. BABU, JJ.
State of Kerala Rep. by the Secretary Home Department – Petitioner
Versus
S. Vijayakumar S/o R. Shamnugan – Respondent
O.P. (KAT) No. 336 of 2020
Decided On : 25-02-2021
Kerala Police Act – Section 101 – Kerala Police Departmental Inquires, Punishment and Appeal Rules, 1958 – Indian Evidence Act – Section 27 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 277 – Indian Penal Code,1860 – Sections 379, 120 and 34 – Abkari Act – Section 8 – Punishment roll minutes – Prayer in Original Petition filed by the petitioners herein in this O.P. (State of Kerala and Others)/respondents 1 to 4 in the O.A. is as to set aside Ext.P4 order in O.A. on the file of the Hon’ble Kerala Administrative Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram Bench by allowing this Original Petition (KAT) – Prayers in Ext.P1 original application, O.A. filed by R1 herein/applicant before KAT, Thiruvananthapuram Bench are as To call for the records leading to Anx.A3, Anx.A6, Anx.A8 and Anx.A11 and to set aside the same – To issue such other orders or directions as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case
Finding of the court :
Court is of the considered view that, the Tribunal cannot be faulted for having issued the impugned directions in question – At any rate, the said directions cannot be said to be illegal or perverse, etc. – Hence, in other words, no grounds for judicial review or judicial superintendence in terms of Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India are made out by the petitioners in this case. – However, court note that the directions had been issued by the Tribunal at Ext.P4 directing that the respondents therein should also issue consequential proceedings in view of the quashment of the impugned disciplinary proceedings. – Time limit thereof was three months, which has expired long ago. – Present O.P. (KAT) has been filed before this Court on 06-10-2020. In view of the long delay in the matter, it is ordered that the petitioners shall ensure the immediate compliance of the abovesaid directions issued by the Tribunal at Ext.P4, without any further delay, at any rate, within six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. – It has to be borne in mind that the abovesaid provision in Section 101 (8)(1) has been engrafted by the State legislature themselves and therefore there cannot be any two views that the provisions contained in the Kerala Police Departmental Enquiries Punishment and Appeal Rules though framed under the provisions of the Kerala Public Service Act, is subservient to the provisions contained in the Kerala Police Act, since the subject matter of Section 101(8)(1) is departmental enquiry proceedings taken in pursuance of the abovesaid statutory rules. –
Result :Original Petition Disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
1. The prayer in the afore captioned Original Petition filed by the petitioners herein in this O.P. (State of Kerala and Others)/respondents 1 to 4 in the O.A. is as follows (See Page No. 11 of the paper-book of this O.P):
2. Heard Sri. Antony Mukkath, learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the petitioners herein. In the nature of the orders proposed to be passed by this Court in this petition, notice to the respondents in the OP/sole original applicant in the O.A. and R5 in the O.A. before the Tribunal will stand dispensed with.
3. The prayers in Ext.P1 original application, O.A. No. 230/2018 filed by R1 herein/applicant before KAT, Thiruvananthapuram Bench are as follows (See Page No. 26 of this paper-book):
(ii) To issue such other orders or directions as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”
4. The Tribunal after hearing both sides has rendered the impugned Ext.P4 order dated 07-01-2020 in O.A. No. 230/2018, whereby it has been held that the applicant was entitled to succeed and that the impugned Anx.A3 punishment roll minutes, Anx.A6 penalty order, Anx.A8 appellate order and Anx.A11 review order have been set aside and the respondents in the O.A. had been directed to issue consequential orders within three months in the light of the abovesaid orders, etc. It is this final order at Ext.P4 rendered by the Tribunal that is under challenge in this original petition.
5. At the time when the applicant had filed Ext.P1 O.A. before the Tribunal, he was serving as Grade Sub Inspector in the Kerala Police Department. It is common ground that during the pendency of the O.A. he had retired from service while holding the said post. He had earlier entered service as a Police Constable in the Special Armed Police (SAP), Thiruvananthapuram on 05-11-1990 and he was transferred to the District Armed Reserve and further to the Local Wing of the Police and later promoted as Head Constable some time in the year 2014. It was while working as a Police Constable at Thiruvananthapuram, Nemom Police Station, that the applicant and two of his colleagues were arrayed as accused in FIR in crime No. 468/2004 of Thiruvananthaparam Nemom Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 379, 120 and 34 of IPC read with Section 8(i)(ii) of Abkari Act. The applicant was arrayed as accused No. 4 therein. The allegations of the abovesaid crime were to the effect that, the spirit, which is allegedly the subject matter of the theft and seized and kept in the Nemom police station was stolen with the connivance of the police personnel of that police station and that the applicant and others are alleged to have connivance to the main accused for taking away the illicit liquor from the police station premises for an amount of Rs. 6,000/-. The applicant and the other co-accused police personnel were placed under suspension from service on 22-12-2004 and later the disciplinary enquiry was ordered in terms of the provisions contained in the Kerala Police Departmental Inquires, Punishment and Appeal Rules, 1958. The applicant was later reinstated in service as per order dated 08-08-2005. An officer of the rank of Inspector of Police was appointed as the Enquiry Officer in the said disciplinary enquiry proceedings and the applicant & the other delinquent police personnel were issued with the impugned Anx.A1 memo of charges dated 21-06-2005. The enquiry officer had completed the enquiry and had submitted Anx.A3 Punishment Roll (PR) minutes/enquiry report, finding that, the applicant and other co-delinquents personnel are guilty of the allegations raised against them in the memo of charges. Howe
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
