BALAKRISHNA PILLAI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SIX District Supply Officers working in various districts have been placed under suspension by Ext. P1 order da ted 4-2-93 passed by the directorof Civil Supplies (for short the Director), This order is purported to have been passed under rule 10 (2) of the Kerala Civil Services (Classification, control and appeal) Rules, 1960 (for short the rules ). Petitioners challenge the impugned order.

(2.) THE main attack against Ext. P1 suspension order is that the Director, who passed the impugned order has no authority under Rule 10 of the Rules. It is contended that the Director is not empowered by the government under Rule 10 of the Rules.

(3.) DETAILED contentions have been raised in all these original petitions regarding the factual situation leading to the suspension and it is contended that there were no reasons or circumstances warranting the suspension of these petitioners. These facts are denied by the Director in the counter-statement. The file leading to the Suspension of these officers has also been produced before me. I am not going into such factual matters, as it is not necessary for the purpose of these petitions. V-assjs&issscs. Asassa.