Kerala High Court
Dr.G.Radhakrishna Pillai vs University Of Calicut on 14 January, 2004
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU
THURSDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2014/13TH AGRAHAYANA, 1936
WP(C).No.28836 of 2014 (D)
----------------------------------------
PETITIONER:
-------------------
DR.G.RADHAKRISHNA PILLAI,SON OF GOPALA PILLAI,
LECTURER IN LIFE SCIENCES DEPARTMENT OF LIFE SCIENCES,
UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT,THENJIPALAM,CALICUT-673 635.
BY ADV. SRI.SIVAN MADATHIL
RESPONDENTS:
------------------------
1. UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR,
THENJIPALAM,MALAPPURAM-673 635.
2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR,
UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT,
THENJIPALAM,MALAPPURAM-673 635.
3. THE SECRETARY,HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,GOVERNMENT SECRTARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
R1 & R2 BY SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW,SC,CALICUTY UNIVERSITY
R3 BY SENIOR GOVT.PLEADER SRI.V.VIJULAL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 04-12-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
pk
WP(C).No.28836 of 2014 (D)
--------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
------------------------------------
EXHIBIT-P1:TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO GA-II/F1/211/00 DATED 14-01-2004
OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT-P2:TRUE COPY OF THE JOINING REPORT DATED 30-03-2007
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT-P3:TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF MEMO OF CHARGES NO.
GAII/F1/211/2000 DATED 23-01-2008 AND STATEMENT OF
ALLEGATIONS ATTACHED THERETO ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT-P4:TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT DATED 03-04-2008
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT-P5:TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLANATION DATED 24-08-2009 SUBMITTED
BY THE PETITIONER TO ENQUIRY COMMITTEE OF THE 1ST
RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY.
EXHIBIT-P6:TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL WITHOUT ANNEXURES
DATED 20-11-2010 PREFERRED BEFORE THE CHANCELLOR/
GOVERNOR OF KERALA BY THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT-P7:TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO GS3-2372/2010 DATED 12-11-2013
PASSED BY THE CHANCELLOR,CALICUT UNIVERSITY.
EXHIBIT-P8:TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION ON 2-01-2014 SUBMITTED BY
THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT-P9:TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 03-04-2014
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT-P10:TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 31-07-2014
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT-P11:TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 26-09-2014 GIVEN BY THE
PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL
---------------------------------------
//TRUE COPY//
P.S.TO JUDGE
pk
Dama Seshadri Naidu, J.
-------------------------------------------
W.P.(C)No.28836 of 2014 D
--------------------------------------------
Dated this the 4th day of December, 2014
JUDGMENT
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 and 2, apart from perusing the record. Since the issue lies in a narrow compass, this Court proposes to dispose of the writ petition at the admission stage itself.
2. Briefly stated, the petitioner, a Lecturer, joined the service of the respondent University on 09.03.1995 in the Department of Life Science. Having been granted leave without allowance from 18.11.2002 to 31.12.2005 by the respondent University, the petitioner left for pursuing research in a Foreign University. Though in 2006 the petitioner re-joined the service owing to the decision taken by the Syndicate on 10.12.2006, his request for extension of WPC 28836/14 2 leave was rejected. Later, in the light of the subsequent developments, the petitioner was removed from service on 02.07.2010 and thereafter owing to the order passed in appeal by the Chancellor of the University, the petitioner was reinstated into service on 26.11.2013.
3. In the above factual background, the petitioner is said to have submitted Exhibits P8 to P10 representations before the first respondent. Seeking expeditious disposal of those representations, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.
In the facts and circumstances, having regard to the respective submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent University, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, disposes of the writ petition with a direction to the first respondent to consider Exhibits P8 to P10 representations of the petitioner in WPC 28836/14 3 accordance with law and pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Dama Seshadri Naidu, Judge tkv