The Appellate Authority must consider the merits of disciplinary proceedings and the stigma of dismissal, rather than merely conducting a judicial review.

JUDGMENT :

Muralee Krishna, J.

W.A. No.828 of 2023 is filed by the respondents and W.A. No.1129 of 2023 is filed by the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.19573 of 2021 challenging the judgment dated 10.01.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby Ext.P3 order dated 07.06.2021 passed by the 1^st appellant the Kerala Tourism Development Corporation Ltd. (‘KTDC’, in short) in W.A. No.828 of 2023, dismissing the appeal filed by the respondent in that writ appeal against the disciplinary action was set aside and the matter was sent back to the 1^st appellant for reconsideration of the appeal specifically taking note of the findings in Ext.P1 judgment dated 19.03.2020 passed by another learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.16227 of 2017. For convenience, the parties are hereinafter referred to in this judgment as they were in the writ petition.

2. The petitioner was appointed as a Company Secretary in Financial Controller in the 1^st respondent KTDC in the year 2012 and was on probation for a year. He was placed under suspension on 24.04.2013, pending disciplinary proceedings. By Ext.P5 proceedings dated 19.01.2015 of the 2^nd respondent Managing Director, his service was terminated with immediate effect. The petitioner submitted Ext.P6 appeal dated 08.02.2016 before the Board of Directors of the 1^st respondent under Clause 79 read with Rule 80 of the Service Rules of the KTDC against Ext.P5 order of termination. The said appeal was dismissed by the order dated 07.01.2017. Thereafter, the petitioner filed W.P.(C)No.16227 of 2017 before this Court challenging the order of termination as well as the order passed in his appeal by the KTDC. As per Ext.P1 judgment dated 19.03.2020, the learned Single Judge set aside the Appellate order and directed the 1^st respondent to consider the appeal on merits afresh in the light of the observations contained in that judgment. In pursuance to the said direction, the KTDC considered the appeal afresh and rejected the same by virtue of Ext.P3 order dated 07.06.2021. Challenging Ext.P3 order, the petitioner filed W.P.(C)No.19573 of 2021 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:

“(i) call for the relevant records pertains to Exts.P3, P5, P13 and P50, issue a writ of certiorari and quash the same as same are unjustified, illegal in the eye of law.

(ii) Call for the records pertaining to order of the appellate authority as also the Disciplinary Authority as the same are vitiated due to malice in law and personal feuds which have fouled the air.

(iii) It be held that the Domestic Enquiry Report is illegal, and hence the same be set aside as it did not consider/ analysed the statement given by the defendant witness and the vital documents produced by the petitioner.

(iv) It be held that the penalty orders viz., suspension and subsequent Termination passed against the petitioner are illegal consequent to which the same be quashed and it be held that the petitioner is entitled to –

(a) have the period of suspension be treated as duty with full pay and allowance including increments from time to time, Provident Fund contribution, medical allowance and Gratuity contribution and such other benefits as may be applicable, in view of the fact that there is no provision for suspension and treat the petitioner as if in service from the date of suspension till the date of Termination.

(b) As the appeal against the order of Termination being set- aside by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.(C) No.16227 of 2017 the periods between date of termination and the attainment of the age of 58 ( i.e., the age of superannuation applicable generally to all employees of the Respondent Corporation) be treated as duty with a direction that the petitioner be paid full pay and allowances including increments from time to time, Provident Fund contribution, medical allowance and Gratuity contribution and such other allowance as may be applicable for the entire period the petitioner has been kept out of office.

(c) Award such exem