D JOHN INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is borne on the cadre of Intelligence Inspector in the Sales Tax Department. He is found guilty of certain charges framed as per Ext.P1 memo and the penalty of reversion from the post of Intelligence Inspector to the lower post for a period of five years has been inflicted on him vide Ext.P7. The petitioner challenges Ext.P3 show cause notice, Ext.P4 report of enquiry, along with Exts.P7 and P8 orders issued by the second respondent-Commissioner of Commercial Taxes.

(2.) Ext.P7 order is appealable. Being aware of that fact the petitioner has invoked that remedy and has filed Ext.P9 appeal before the first respondent on 22.12.2006. Pending consideration of Ext.P9, this writ petition has been filed.

(3.) Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that there are genuine and justifiable grounds for the petitioner to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court and seek the reliefs prayed for in this writ petition. Various grounds have been urged in support of the above prayers. However, I do not propose to go into any of those contentions despite vehement submissions made by the senior counsel, because the appellate remedy invoked by the petitioner is statutory and effective. The Government has got the power as also the duty to look into factual as well as legal aspects and take appropriate decision. The power to be exercised by the appellate authority as also the procedure to be followed are statutorily streamlined as discernible from Rule 31 of Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 1960. The above rule says as to how an appeal should be dealt with and orders passed. It is not therefore necessary for this Court to state in advance as to how the first respondent shall deal with Ext.P9 appeal. However, in order to obviate any apprehension in the mind of the petitioner that his appeal may not be considered extenso. it is made clear that the appellate authority shall advert to all the contentions raised in Ext.P9 and additional grounds, if any, he may urge in a supplementary memorandum of appeal in the light of the contentions he has urged in this writ petition. If such a supplementary appeal memorandum is filed, the first respondent shall consider the contentions therein also and shall pass a speaking order.