IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD AUGUST 2011 / 12TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 3382 of 2011(W) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ PROF.DR.V.JAYAPRAKAS, S/O.K.VASU, 'SHIVAM', TC 13/731/1, THARAPADOM LANE, KUNNUKUZHI P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695037. BY ADVS. SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS SRI.PAUL JACOB (P) SRI.ROSHEN.D.ALEXANDER SMT.INDU SUSAN JACOB SMT.NISHA JOHN SRI.ENOCH DAVID SIMON JOEL RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-PIN- 695 001. 2. UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, REP. BY REGISTRAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 034. 3. SUJITH S.S., THRIVENI,NEELANADU, VENJARAMMOODU,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 607. 4. DR.M.K.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, (FORMER VICE CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA), THIRUMALA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695006. 5. PROF.K.A.HASHIM, REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 034. 6. N.SUKUMARAN COMMITTEE, TRIVENY, WARRIAM ROAD, KOCHI-16, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. R1 BY ADDL.ADVOCATE GENERAL SRI.K.A.JALAL R2 BY ADV. SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/08/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C)NO.3382/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29/4/2005 ISSUED BY THE CHANCELLOR OF KERALA UNIVERSITY. P2 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT NO.572/2008 FILED BEFORE THE LOK AYUKTA BY 3RD RESPONDENT. P3 COPY OF THE PRESS-NOTE DATED 30/5/2008 ISSUED BY THE PRO OF THE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA. P4 COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 2/6/2008 FILED BY THE REGISTRAR OF KERALA UNIVERSITY. P5 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 13/6/2008 ISSUED BY THE LOK AYUKTA IN COMPLAINT NO.572/2008. P6 COPY OF THE COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT DATED 4/7/2008 ALONG WITH THE DOCUMENTS PRODUCED BEFORE THE LOK AYUKTA. P7 COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE PETITIONER HEREIN BEFORE THE LOK AYUKTA DATED 29/7/2008. P8 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C)NO.32034/2008 AND CONNECTED CASES. P9 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10/12/2010 PASSED BY THE SUKUMARAN COMMITTEE. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.3382/2011-W ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 3rd day of August, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner herein is challenging Ext.P9 report filed by the sixth respondent Committee. He was the Pro-Vice Chancellor of the second respondent- University. 2. The Committee was appointed by this Court as per the common Judgment Ext.P8 in W.P.(C).No.32034/2008 and connected cases. The petitioner who was the petitioner in W.P.(C).No.32034/2008 is now aggrieved by the report itself produced as Ext.P9 herein. 3. In Ext.P8 Judgment of this Court, various directions were issued and in terms of the directions issued by this Court, the Committee, after completion of the investigation, has produced the report before the Upa Lok Ayukta. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the first respondent and the learned Standing Counsel for the University. Going by paras.42 and 43 of the W.P.(C). No.3382/2011 -:2:- Judgment Ext.P8, the Upa Lok Ayukta is directed to treat the investigation report as one compiled and submitted before it in terms of Section 9 of the Lok Ayukta Act and shall be entitled to rely on the same for further enabling it to draw up a final report under Section 12(3) of the Act. 5. The question is whether this Court at this stage need go into the various contentions raised challenging the report since the matter is admittedly pending before the Upa Lok Ayukta. As on today, no final conclusions have been arrived at by the Upa Lok Ayukta in respect of any of the matters including anything concerning the petitioner, and no such order is under challenge here. Therefore, it is too premature for this Court to go into the veracity of the findings in the report and apart from that this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India will not be justified at this stage to consider the various conclusions and findings contained in the report by analysing the evidence. For all these reasons, the writ petition is dismissed. If any adverse report is W.P.(C). No.3382/2011 -:3:- made by the Lok Ayukta against the petitioner, the petitioner can challenge it in appropriate proceedings or before this Court, as the case may be. All the contentions are left open and it is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the matter. No costs. Sd/- (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms