Kerala High Court
Jaseer.M.M vs State Of Kerala on 9 June, 2009
Author: P.N.Ravindran
Bench: P.N.Ravindran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 15850 of 2009(A)
1. JASEER.M.M., PEON,
... Petitioner
2. SREELAL.K., SECTION OFFICER,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
2. THE ASSITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY (PUBLIC
For Petitioner :SRI.P.SREEKUMAR
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :09/06/2009
O R D E R
P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.
-------------------------------------
W.P.(C)Nos.15850 & 15873 of 2009
--------------------------------------
Dated 9th June, 2009
JUDGMENT
Common questions arise in these writ petitions. They were therefore heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. Heard Sri.P.Sreekumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in W.P.(C)No.15850 of 2009 and Sri.T.A.Shaji, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in W.P.(C)No.15873 of 2009. The petitioners are Government employees working in the Administrative Secretariat at Thiruvananthapuram. The first petitioner in W.P.(C)No.15850 of 2009 is working as Peon in the office of the Principal Secretary to Government Taxes Department and the second petitioner therein is working as Section Officer in the office of the Rural Development Commissioner. The first petitioner in W.P.(C)No.15873 of 2009 is working as Selection Grade Assistant in the General Administration Department, the second petitioner therein is working as Under Secretary to Government, General Administration Department and the third petitioner therein is working as Section Officer in Local Self Government Department.
WP(C).Nos.15850 & 15873 of 2009 2
3. It is not in dispute that at about 12.30 p.m. on 12.5.2009, a section of employees in the Administrative Secretariat assembled outside the Chambers of the Hon'ble Minister for Co- operation, Coir and Devaswom, shouted slogans and also interacted with personnel of the electronic and print media who had assembled in the premises. It is stated that the Private Secretary and the Additional Private Secretary to the Hon'ble Minister for Co-operation, Coir and Devaswom were manhandled, roughed up and also verbally abused. Thereupon, Crime No.175 of 2009 of Cantonment Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram was registered against the petitioners and others. The meeting that took place outside the Chambers of the Hon'ble Minister was recorded by the electronic media. After registration of the above crime and on the basis of the complaint filed by the Private Secretary to the Hon'ble Minister, the Government initiated disciplinary action against the petitioners and others and thereupon, eight employees of the Administrative Secretariat including the petitioners were placed under suspension by Ext.P4 order dated 13.5.2009 produced in W.P.(C)No.15850 of 2009 in contemplation of disciplinary proceedings. A preliminary enquiry was thereafter conducted and a report submitted by the Additional Chief Secretary to Government pursuant to which Ext.P8 order dated 30.5.2009 was issued revoking WP(C).Nos.15850 & 15873 of 2009 3 the suspension of three among the eight persons referred to in Ext.P4. The suspension of the petitioners was not revoked. In these writ petitions, the petitioners challenge the Government order dated 13.5.2009 placing them under suspension. The petitioners in W.P.(C) No.15850 of 2009 also seek to quash Ext.P7 report submitted by the Additional Chief Secretary to Government while the petitioners in W.P. (C)No.15873 of 2009 also seek a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the Government to consider the request made by them in Ext.P13 for revocation of their suspension.
4. The petitioners do not dispute the fact that they were not in their work stations at about 12.30 p.m. on 12.5.2009. They were admittedly present outside the Chambers of the Hon'ble Minister for Co-operation, Coir and Devaswom. Some of them were also seen interacting with the media. In fact, Ext.P7 report submitted by the Additional Chief Secretary would show that the first petitioner in W.P. (C)No.15873 of 2009 was seen holding the microphone of a news channel and addressing the gathering. The video recording which is referred to in detail in Ext.P7 discloses that the petitioners in these writ petitions were in the forefront of what happened on 12.5.2009 at or about 12.30 p.m. The petitioners attack the order of suspension on various grounds. They contend that on political grounds they have WP(C).Nos.15850 & 15873 of 2009 4 been placed under suspension. In my opinion, on the facts disclosed in Ext.P7 report submitted by the Additional Chief Secretary, the decision taken by the Government to place the petitioners under suspension cannot be said to be in any way vitiated. The mere fact that the petitioners were not in their respective work stations and were seen outside the Chambers of the Hon'ble Minister for Co-operation, Coir and Devaswom addressing the electronic media and were not discharging their duties but were engaged in an activity other than discharge of their official functions during duty hours was in my opinion good enough a reason to place them under suspension. The public have a right to insist that Government servants discharge their duties promptly. This right gives rise to a corresponding duty on the part of Government servants to discharge their duties promptly. It is common knowledge that a large number of issues relating to Government servants and other citizens, frequently came up before the Government. As officers employed in the Administrative Secretariat, the petitioners had a duty to attend to such matters. Instead, they were found addressing the print and electronic media during office hours. In such circumstances, if the Government decided to initiate disciplinary action against the petitioners and also to place them under suspension, it cannot be said that the Government have WP(C).Nos.15850 & 15873 of 2009 5 acted arbitrarily in placing them under suspension. Whether the complaint lodged against them by the Private Secretary to the Hon'ble Minister for Co-operation, Coir and Devaswom, lacks merit or not is not for this Court to decide in these proceedings. It is for the Police investigating the crime to file the final report and if charges are framed, for the concerned trial Magistrate to decide the issue. In my considered opinion, it cannot be said that no grounds existed warranting the suspension of the petitioners. I am therefore constrained to hold that the challenge to the order of suspension passed by the Government on 13.5.2009 is without any merit. These writ petitions fail and are accordingly dismissed. I make it clear that the dismissal of these writ petitions will not stand in the way of the Government from considering whether the suspension of the petitioners should be revoked, if the petitioners move the Government in that regard and the Government are of the opinion that no grounds exist to continue the order of suspension.
P.N.RAVINDRAN Judge TKS