Titus vs State of Kerala and Another

Vein Pillai, J.—The Petitioner was an upper division clerk in the Board of Revenue, referred to hereafter as the Board, and his increment was stopped by way of punishment by its Secretary. His appeals to the Board and later to Government, did not prove successful, and he has therefore filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The question for decision is, whether the Secretary to the Board was competent to impose the punishment on him. The Government had, by notification dated February 11, 1957, delegated to the Secretary to the Board, the power to sanction increments to all non-gazetted officers subject to the provisions in the Service Rules. The Service Rules then in force, were replaced by the Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957 with effect from April 9, 1957. Under Rule 13 of these rules, the Secretary to the Board was competent to impose the penalty of withholding increments, but under the proviso to sub-rule (1) he was bound "before imposing the penalty................. report the matter to the appointing authority and obtain its prior sanction". This provision was in force at the time the punishment was inflicted on the petitioner. Admittedly, this direction was not complied with by the Secretary to the Board. Assuming that the delegation to him, referred to above, is wide enough to cover the imposition of the penalty of withholding increments, his action in the present case cannot be sustained, under the proviso to the aforesaid Rule. The order imposing the punishment is therefore quashed on the above ground. The petition is allowed accordingly, but without costs.