GANGADHARAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The sole issue raised in this writ petition is regarding the entitlement of the petitioner to get his pay and allowances for the period of suspension after treating the period as duty for all purposes. By the impugned order, Ext. P8, the same has been limited to subsistence allowance already drawn by him. The petitioner's claim is based on the fact that even though a criminal investigation was launched against him consequent on which, he was suspended, that was dropped as there was no material against him. After reinstatement in service, a departmental enquiry was ordered in which also he was fully exonerated. The question is whether the same has to be considered under Rule 56B of Part I K.S.R. or under Rule 57 of the same Part.

(2.) The necessary facts for disposal of the writ petition are the following: The petitioner has retired on superannuation as Deputy Tahsildar on 30-6-2006. The action culminating in his suspension arose when he was working as a Village Officer, Morazha Village. Along with a Villageman, he was arrayed as an accused in a Vigilance Case No. VC 1/03/KNR. The allegation was demand of bribe from a person for issuing possession certificate and site plan. He was also arrested along with the Villageman and was remanded to judicial custody. The arrest was on 17-1-2003. Ext. P1 is the order of suspension dated 20-1 -2003 wherein he was placed under suspension with effect from 17-1 -2003.

(3.) Ext. P2 is the report of the Director of Vigilance and Anti-corruption Bureau, submitted to the Government after the investigation. This is dated 20-11 -2003. It was reported that there is no evidence to connect A1 except the oral statement of the complainant. Accordingly, it is decided to prosecute A2 only and it is also recommended to take departmental action against Shri. C. Gangadhara, A1, who is the petitioner herein. He was reinstated in service on 22-1-2004.