N PRAKASH Vs. HIGH COURT OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The reliefs prayed for in this writ petition are the following:

(2.) I have heard the petitioner who argued his case as party in person and Sri.KRB Kaimal, Senior Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 3. In the nature of the order I propose to pass, it is not necessary to issue notice to respondent No.4.

(3.) The grievance of the petitioner is against that part of Ext.P14 which inter alia says that the petitioner may submit his written statement of defence, if any, to Sri.K.A.Abraham, Additional Director of the Kerala Judicial Academy who has been appointed the Enquiry Officer as per High Court proceedings dated 11.12.2006 to conduct enquiry in the disciplinary proceedings against him. One other ground, which makes the petitioner feels aggrieved, is that his request for supply of documents in order to facilitate him to submit the written statement in reply to Ext.P14 has not been allowed. It is submitted by the petitioner that he had filed Ext.P6 representation requesting to revoke the order of suspension and to reinstate him in service pending disciplinary proceedings initiated pursuant to orders passed in R.17/2004 (SS/R/13/2006(SS) and the memo of charges issued in those proceedings as also the connected proceedings. A domestic enquiry has been ordered in respect of the charges framed against the petitioner in those proceedings. The order of suspension referred to above was passed in connection with the said proceedings. During the pendency of the said proceedings, Ext.P14 memo of charges has been issued to the petitioner. Under the circumstances, he has filed this writ petition seeking to set aside Ext.P14 and to grant attendant reliefs.