SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 3854

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
SANTHOSHKUMAR K – Appellant
Versus
THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 22321 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.C.S.AJITH PRAKASH, SHRI.T.K.DEVARAJAN, SHRI.BABU M., SMT.ANCY THANKACHAN, SHRI.XAVIER K.K., SMT.KRISHNENDU.D
For the Respondents: SMT.R.RANJANIE

A suspension order must be issued by the proper authority and must be justified to be legally valid.

Headnote:This writ petition was filed seeking to quash the suspension order issued by the respondents, on the grounds that it was unjust and illegal. The Court directed the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner to conclude within six months, while continuing the interim stay against the suspension. The Court held that the suspension order issued lacked proper authority and legal foundation.

JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers :

i. “to call for the records leading to the issuance of Exhibit P10 suspension order and quash the same by issuing a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order by this Hon’ble Court.

ii. to declare that the suspension order Exhibit P10 is unjustified and illegal as the same is issued on extraneous reason and under dictation from the 1st respondent, who is not the disciplinary authority of the petitioner.

iii. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, directing respondent 1 and 2 to consider Ext P13 representation submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders revoking suspension and reinstate the petitioner in the same post where from he suspended.

iv. Issue such other order or direction, as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper to grant, in the nature and course of the proceedings.

v. To exempt the petitioner from producing the English translation of the Malayalam Exhibits produced along with this Writ Petition and the petitioner further undertakes that he is ready and willing to produce English translation of Malayalam documents as and when required.” [sic]

2 When this writ petition came up for consideration on 19.06.2025, this Court passed the following order :

“Admit. Standing Counsel takes notice for respondents 2 to 5. Government Pleader takes notice for respondents 1 and 6.

Respondents to place on record their counter affidavit.

There will be an interim stay as prayed for, for a period of one month.”

3. The impugned order is a suspension order.

Now, this Court already stayed the suspension order and the same is being extended regularly. I am of the considered opinion that this writ petition need not be retained here. There can be a direction to the respondents to conclude the disciplinary proceedings initiated within a time frame. Till then, the interim order can continue.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions :

1) The 2nd respondent is directed to conclude the disciplinary proceedings, if any pending against the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, after giving sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

2) Till then, the interim order passed by this Court staying the suspension will continue.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top