Pushpakumar N v. M.D., K.S.R.T.C

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/28TH JYAISHTA, 1937 WP(C).No. 18227 of 2015 (C) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

----------------------- PUSHPAKUMAR N, ABKARI, WORKER, FL 1-3014, KERALA STATE BEVARAGES, MANUFACTURING AND MARKETING CORPORATION LIMITED, ADOOR, RESIDING AT THIRUVATHIRA, KILIVAYAL, VADAKKADATHUKAVU, ERATHU VILLAGE, ADOOR.

BY ADVS.SRI.P.SREEKUMAR SRI.S.PRASANTH SMT.P.M.MAZNA MANSOOR RESPONDENT(S):

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

1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE BEVERAGES (MANUFACTURING AND MARKETING) CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695 010.

2. THE MANAGER, FL 1-3014 SHOP, KERALA STATE BEVERAGES (MANUFACTURING AND MARKETING) CORPORATION LIMITED, ADOOR, PI - 691 523.

BY SRI.C.S.AJITH PRAKASH,SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

PJ

WP(C).No. 18227 of 2015 (C) ---------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT-P1TRUE COPY OF THE TRANSFER ORDER DATED 21/08/2010 OF THE RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT-P2TRUE COPY OF SOME OF THE LEAVE APPLICATIONS ALONG WITH MEDICAL CERTIFICATES SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT-P3TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 04/12/2010 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT-P4TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO OF CHARGE DATED 23/01/2011 AND STATEMENT OF ALLEGATION ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT-P5TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT-P6TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 23/08/2014 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL.

/ TRUE COPY / P.S. TO JUDGE PJ

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

............................................................. W.P.(C).No.18227 of 2015 ............................................................. Dated this the 18th day of June, 2015 J U D G M E N T The petitioner, who is an abkari worker, working under the respondent Corporation, apprehends that his services will be terminated pursuant to disciplinary proceedings that have been initiated against him. The grievance of the petitioner essentially is that, while there were certain proceedings initiated against him by the service of Ext.P4 charge memo, the fate of those proceedings has not been intimated to the petitioner and he has not been informed of further proceedings pursuant to the said charge memo. Highlighting his grievance, he has preferred Ext.P6 representation before the 1st respondent. The limited prayer of the petitioner in the writ petition is for a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on the said representation expeditiously.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing counsel for the respondents. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the bar, I direct the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P6 representation within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE mns