MOHAMMED SULAIMAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.24640 of 2017 on the file of this court. He had in the said writ petition challenged Ext.P7 order of suspension and Ext.P9 memo of charges and prayed for a direction to the respondents to reinstate him in service. The brief facts of the case are as follows:

(2.) The appellant entered service as Mazdoor in Malabar Cements Limited on 02.07.1984. In course of time, he was promoted to the category of Machinery Attender and thereafter to the post of Welfare Officer (Trainee) on 26.05.1993. After successful completion of training, he was appointed as Welfare Officer on a regular basis with effect from 26.06.1994. Still later, he was promoted to the post of Personal Officer with effect from 01.06.2004. The post of Personal Officer was re-designated as Assistant Manager in December, 2013. Pursuant to the decision taken by the Board of Directors of Malabar Cements Limited at its meeting held on 29.06.2013, it was resolved that the appellant will assist Sri.N.Srinivasan, Deputy General Manager (P&A) for works in connection with all legal matters. By the very same resolution, the Board of Directors also resolved to entrust all legal matters relating to Malabar Cements Limited to Sri.N.Srinivasan, Deputy General Manager (P&A) who possesses a law decree, in the place of Sri.Prakash Joseph, Legal Officer against whom disciplinary action had been initiated.

(3.) The appellant was the Presenting Officer in the disciplinary proceedings initiated against Sri.Prakash Joseph, Legal Officer. After enquiry, the enquiry officer submitted a report dated 21.05.2015 finding Sri.Prakash Joseph, Legal Officer guilty of all the charges levelled against him. Sri.K.Padmakumar, the then Managing Director disagreed with the findings of the enquiry officer and exonerated Sri.Prakash Joseph of all the charges as per proceedings dated 10.06.2015. The then Managing Director had in the meanwhile placed the appellant under suspension as per Ext.P2 order of suspension dated 20.05.2015. The appellant thereupon submitted an explanation. After considering the explanation, the then Managing Director reinstated the appellant in service as per Ext.P3 order dated 10.06.2015. Though a memo of charges was later issued and the appellant submitted a reply to the memo of charges, no progress was made in the matter.