V.M. KARUNAKARAN Vs. ZAMORIN RAJA OF CALICUT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition has been filed seeking to direct the 1st respondent to reinstate the petitioner in service forthwith treating his suspension period as service without any break and to direct respondents 2 and 3 to conduct a full-fledged enquiry in respect of the allegations raised.

(2.) The petitioner joined service under the Zamorin Central Devaswom in 1990. He was appointed as Administrative Officer of Zamorin Central Devaswom in 2007. While working so, on 26.12.2017, the Bandarams of Alathiyur Perumthrikkovil, Tirur Taluk were opened and counted under the supervision of the 4th respondent -Devaswom Inspector. The Central Devaswom Office soon thereafter received a complaint alleging misappropriation of the currency subjected to counting. The complaints were received along with two CDs through post. The petitioner being Administrative Officer, perused the complaint. Taking into account the gravity of the allegations involved, the petitioner forwarded the complaint to the 1st respondent -Trustee of the Devaswom along with a note.

(3.) The petitioner states that he has done so bona fide for facilitating the Trustee to take appropriate decision in the matter. But, to the surprise of the petitioner, he was issued with Ext. P1 show-cause notice dated 28.03.2018 from the 1st respondent alleging that by forwarding the complaint along with a note, the petitioner acted with prejudice and haste. The petitioner submitted Ext. P2 explanation dated 02.04.2018. By Ext. P3 letter dated 03.04.2018, the petitioner was informed that his explanation is not satisfactory. Ext. P3 required the petitioner to appear before a Committee. The petitioner appeared before the Committee. Subsequently, Ext. P4 show-cause notice dated 17.09.2018 was served on the petitioner stating that the Committee has found that the petitioner is guilty of concocting false allegation and complaint against the 4th respondent. The petitioner denied the allegation and submitted Ext. P5 explanation dated 22.09.2018. However, as per Ext. P6 order dated 29.09.2018, the petitioner was suspended pending domestic enquiry. An Advocate was appointed as enquiry officer on 10.10.2018. Ext. P9 charge memo dated 07.01.2019 was served on the petitioner.