Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Sunil Kumar R vs The Kerala Shipping And Inland ... on 3 September, 2021

Author: Sunil Thomas

Bench: Sunil Thomas

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
     FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 12TH BHADRA, 1943
                      WP(C) NO. 17874 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

      1      SUNIL KUMAR R.,
             AGED 47 YEARS
             S/O. G. RAGHAVAN, 'AMBIKA MANDIRAM', KARIYANGIL
             COLONY, PARUTHIKUZHI P.O., NEDUMANGAD,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695541.

             BY ADVS.
             SHABU SREEDHARAN
             V.PRINCE DEV
             JINSON OUSEPH
             CHITRA VIJAYAN

RESPONDENTS:

      1      THE KERALA SHIPPING AND INLAND NAVIGATION
             CORPORATION LTD. - KSINC,
             REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
             UDAYA NAGAR ROAD, GANDHI NAGAR, KOCHI-682020.

      2      THE COMPANY SECRETARY,
             THE KERALA SHIPPING AND INLAND NAVIGATION
             CORPORATION LTD. - KSINC, UDAYA NAGAR ROAD, GANDHI
             NAGAR, KOCHI-682020.

             BY ADV.SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW, SC


       THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON    03.09.2021,   THE   COURT    ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 17874 OF 2021
                                     2




                              JUDGMENT

Dated this the 03rd day of September, 2021 The petitioner herein was issued with a notice to show cause why he shall not be removed from service for repeated unauthorised absence. He appeared and made his submissions. Subsequently, he was removed from service. Contending that the removal was in violation of the provisions of the KSINC Service Rules, the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 review petition before the Board of Directors requesting them to reconsider the decision. The grievance of the petitioner is that inspite of the fact that the review petition was filed on 01.03.2021, no action has been taken on it till now.

2. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent submitted that due to the existing pandemic, the Board could not meet for the last few months and accordingly, the review petition could not be taken up.

3. Having heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the WP(C) NO. 17874 OF 2021 3 respondents, I am inclined to dispose of the Writ Petition itself with a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to convene a meeting of the Board of Directors as expeditiously as possible, and if for any reason the meeting could not be convened within the limit fixed by this Court, meeting shall be convened by virtual mode and to pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of forty five days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The Writ Petition is disposed of, as above.

Sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS JUDGE SKP/3-9 WP(C) NO. 17874 OF 2021 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17874/2021 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER WITH NO. A-
9/355/2006 DATED 01/12/2006.
EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE KSINC SERVICE RULES DATED NIL.
EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REVIEW PETITION WITHOUT THE ANNEXURES PRODUCED THEREIN SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 01/03/2021.
EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONERS DATED 16/03/2021.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE