IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 13TH JANUARY 2011 / 23RD POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 1224 of 2011(C) ------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. ARIVANANDAN, S/O.KRISHNAN, VADAKKUPURAM, NALLEPPILLY P.O., PALAKKAD. 2. K.SOORAJ, S/O.KRISHNAMOORTHY, `MADHAVI MANDIRAM' THENARI P.O., ELAPPULLY, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN, SMT.A.R.PRAVITHA, SMT.RASHMI RAVINDRAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, VIGILANCE AND ANTICORRUPTION BUREAU, PALAKKAD-678 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. SAID MUHAMMED, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES, IN-CHARGE OF DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES, MALAMPUZHA-678 051. R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. K.J. MOHAMMED ANZAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/01/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== W.P(C) No.1224 of 2011 ==================================== Dated this the 13th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioners are acqua farmers of Palakkad District dealing with acqua culture. It is stated that Government of Kerala has formulated a scheme by name 'Matsyakeralam' to give financial assistance to acqua farmers for development of acqua culture and funds have been sanctioned by the Government for the said purpose. Respondent No.3, the Deputy Director of Fisheries, Malampuzha is empowered to select persons to be included in the list for sanctioning benefits. It is contended that all persons selected are friends and relatives of respondent No.3 and farmers like petitioners though included in the list were not given intimation and benefits were granted to kith and kin of respondent No.3. It is contended that respondent No.3 has misused his official position and misappropriated public money. Grievance of petitioners is that in spite of Exts.P1 and P2, representations filed before the appropriate authority and Ext.P6, complaint, no action has been taken. Hence it is prayed that appropriate direction may be issued to investigate into the matter. I have heard learned No.1224 of 2010 -: 2 :- counsel for petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor. 2. On going through the petition it appears to me that proper remedy of petitioner is to approach the court of Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge concerned with a complaint if petitioners have any complaint as alleged. Hence without prejudice to the right if any of petitioners to approach the court of Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge concerned this Writ Petition is closed. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv