A T GEORGE Vs. P SARALAKUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Common questions arise in all these writ petitions filed by the State of Kerala, under Article 226 of the Constitution, challenging identically worded orders passed by the Kerala Lok Ayuktha, in complaints preferred by the contesting respondents herein. The facts involved in all these cases are also so similar, as could be called as identical. Therefore, all these writ petitions have been heard and are disposed of by this common judgment. For the sake of convenience, W.P.(C) No. 3565/07 is taken as the leading case.

(2.) Nine police constables of the District Armed Reserve, Thiruvananthapurarn, were dismissed by the Governor of Kerala. They were dismissed as per G.O.(Rt) No. 1041/74 dated 26-6-1974, after the Governor of Kerala was personally satisfied under the proviso to Article 311 of the Constitution of India that in the interest of the security of the State, it is not expedient to hold an enquiry in the case of the said 9 policemen of the District Armed Reserve, Thiruvananthapuram. It was further found that the activities of the said 9 policemen are such as to warrant dismissal from service. Therefore, the Governor dismissed the aforesaid 9 policemen from service with immediate effect.

(3.) That the said order was not challenged before any court. But, a representation was filed by one among the 9 persons in 1987, and it seems that the Governor reviewed the earlier order of dismissal on the basis of the said representation. There was a further direction that the order dismissing them from service is liable to be vacated. They were ordered to be reinstated in service. This is as per G.O.(Rt) No. 4737/97 dated 30-7-1997. Paragraph 4 of the said order reads as follows: