RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Two questions of general importance arise for consideration in this case; (1) Is it necessary to furnish a copy of the inquiry report and give an opportunity to a delinquent before the inquiry report is accepted and punishment awarded based on the findings in the inquiry report; and (2) whether withholding of increment with cumulative effect is permissible under the Kerala Police Departmental Enquiries, Punishment and Appeal Rules, 1958 If the answer to the second question is in the affirmative, the decision in Damodaran v. State of Kerala, reported in ILR 2004 (2) Ker. 634 , has to be overruled.

(2.) Appellant is the petitioner in O.P.No.14379/1995. The said Writ Petition was filed aggrieved by the orders passed in the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner. The Superintendent of Police, Alappuzha initiated departmental action against the petitioner on serving Ext. P 1 memo of charges. On denial of the allegations an inquiry was caused to be conducted through the Deputy Superintendent of Police. The Inquiry Officer submitted a report with the finding that the charges were proved. The disciplinary authority accepting the report of the Inquiry Officer imposed the punishment of barring three increments with cumulative effect as per Ext. P4 order. Along with the order petitioner was also served copy of the Punishment Roll - the report of inquiry. He preferred an appeal raising, among other grounds, the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice. The Appellate Authority reduced the punishment to barring of two increments with cumulative effect. Appellant was unsuccessful before the Government.

(3.) The learned single Judge elaborately considered the merits of the case and declined to interfere with the matter and hence the Writ Appeal.