SURESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Discipline decides the destiny of life and destination in service. Discipline is the core and cornerstone of service. However, discipline as understood in common parlance is different from the discipline as defined in the Service Rules though the latter has the trappings of the former. As far as the Government servant is concerned, disciplinary action can be initiated only in case the officer concerned is liable to be proceeded against for his in disciplined conduct. Suspension from service is a prelude to the disciplinary action. But suspension is not a precondition or unavoidable accompaniment for a disciplinary action. It is required, nay warranted, only if as part of the action and in overall public interest the officer is to be temporarily kept out of service for a free and fair enquiry. No doubt, suspension is not a punishment, unless of course prescribed as such in the relevant Rules. B ut merely because suspension is not a punishment, the employer cannot be take a casual approach and after a few days or months reinstate the officer, even with back wages. The stigma cannot be washed away or wiped out, though in the legal parlance it is possible. For an honest officer, a baseless or motivated action is certainly painful. That is why the law and procedure on suspension call for strict interpretation. Of course, justification for suspension is different from validity of suspension. This introduction would held us as a prologue in analyzing the question of law raised in this writ Petition.

(2.) Short facts. The Writ Petition is filed by the applicant (hereinafter rendered to as the petitioner) before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Kochi, in O. A. No.12/2009. The said application was filed challenging order dated 11.2.2008 of the Government of kerala whereby the petitioner was suspended from service. The impugned order annexure A7 (Ext. P1) reads as follows:-

(3.) The Tribunal dismissed the application. Hence the Writ Petition.