IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH JULY 2008 / 8TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 20740 of 2008() ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ K.I.ANEY, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O. KUTTAN AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN PERUMATTY, PALAKKADU, (UNDER SUSPENSION) RESIDING AT VETTASSERIL, PERINGALA, KAYAMKKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI (SR.) SRI.C.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (AGRICULTURE) DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 3. ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE (BIO-GAS) DIRECTORATE AGRICULTURE VIKAS BHAVAN THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 4. K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE (BIO-GAS) DIRECTORATE AGRICULTURE VIKAS BHAVAN THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ADDL.R5 5. THE DIRECTOR, VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU, TRIVANDRUM (Impleaded as Addl.R5 as per order dated 10.7.2008 in W.P.(C).) BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.M.R.SREELATHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 20740 of 2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1- A TRUE PHOTOCPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE NEWS PAPER IN KERALA KAUMUDI DAILY DATED 12.11.99 EXT.P2- A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SAID WRIT UP PUBLISHED BY THE MATHRUBHOOMI DAILY DATED 24.12.99 EXT.P3- A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF HTE NEWS PAER IN DESHABHIMANI DAILY ON 22.8.06 EXT.P4- A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER R.HALI EXT.P5- A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SAID TRANSFER ORDER DATED 9.2.2008 EXT.P6- A TRUE PHOTOCPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE NEWSPAPER MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 15.5.07 EXT.P7- A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE PAPER DATED 24.4.08 OF MATHRUBHOOMI DAILY EXT.P8- A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE NEWSPAPER IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 16.4.08 EXT.P9- A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION IN MATHRUBHOOMI DAILY DATED 25.5.08 EXT.P10- A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE MATHRUBHOOMI DAILY DATED 16.6.2008 EXT.P11- A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE PROJECT DATED 6.6.08 EXT.P12- A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE OBJECTION EXT.P13- A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE HINDU DAILY DATED 4.6.08 EXT.P14- A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 4.6.08 EXT.P15- A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SUSPENSION ORDER DATED 23.6.08 EXT.P16- A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEVANT OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 21.5.79 EXT.P17- A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OFTHE G.O. DATED 12.5.92 EXT.P18- A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DATED 21.6.08 (True Copy) P.S.To Judge mrcs V.GIRI, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C).No.20740 of 2008 C ------------------------- Dated this the 30nd day of July, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner, who is an Agricultural Officer at Krishi Bhavan, Perumatty, challenges Ext.P15 order of suspension. After hearing both sides, the following order was passed on 10.7.2008: “Admit. Issue notice by Messenger to respondents 1 to 4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I think it is appropriate that the Director of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau is also made a party. Accordingly, the Director of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau at Trivandrum shall be made a party. Issue notice by messenger to the Director of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau also. Govt. Pleader shall ensure that the files containing the letter dated 8.2.2007 sent by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau, Palakkad referred to in Ext.P5 order as also the files containing the recommendation made by the Director of Agriculture on 7.5.2008 along with the enquiry report of the Addl. Director of Agriculture (Biogas) referred to in Ext.P15 are made available. Post on 16.7.08”. 2. Pursuant thereto, the files were made available for my perusal and I have perused the same. Reference is made to the report of the W.P.(C).NO.20740 of 2008 :: 2 :: Director of Agriculture, Thiruvananthapuram, along with the report of the Additional Director of Agriculture (Biogas). The enquiry report of sri.K.K.Ramakrishnan, Additional Director of Agriculture (Biogas) significantly is dated 30.5.2007 and it related to certain alleged irregularities committed by the petitioner when he was posted in the Orange and Vegetable Farm at Nelliampathi. There was an inspection by a team headed by the Deputy Superintendent, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau, Palakkad into certain allegations regarding the functioning of the Orange and Vegetable Farm at Nelliampathi and they had forwarded a reported on 30.5.2007. This is pursuant to an inspection conducted by the Additional Director of Agriculture (Biogas) on 4.5.2007. Apparently, in the surprise check report pursuant to the inspection conducted on 6.2.2007 and 9.2.2007, there was a recommendation for registration of a Vigilance case against the petitioner for the offences under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act for the shortage in the stock of Fashion Fruits W.P.(C).NO.20740 of 2008 :: 3 :: Squash, Guava Jelly and alleged non-accounting of 99 litres of diesel, 10 litres of petrol and 10 litres of engine oil. There was also a recommendation to take action against Sri.Cherian Thomas, Former Superintendent of the Farm for different allegations. There was a further recommendation to initiate departmental action against Sri.Cherian Thomas and the petitioner for the shortage in stock in Mango Squash amounting Rs.95,175/- and for 325 bottles of Guava Jelly amounting to Rs.11,375/- not actually supplied. The report of the Additional Director of Agriculture (Biogas), which is referred to in Ext.P15 order covers different aspects. Though it also refers to the necessity for transferring certain files to the Vigilance Wing of the Directorate as such, the letter sent by the Director of Agriculture on 7.5.2008 only enclosed the report of the Additional Director of Agriculture (Biogas), which I have referred to. 3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner Mr.K.P.Dandapani and Mr.Rajendran submit that the order of suspension is issued without application of the mind by the W.P.(C).NO.20740 of 2008 :: 4 :: Government. Counsel refer to Ext.P5 order by which the petitioner was transferred from Nelliampathi to Perumatty, apparently, after the inspection by the Vigilance Wing. It is more an year since he has started functioning at Perumatty. The suspension, at this stage, in the absence of any fresh materials warranting a suspension of the petitioner, is challenged as being resultant upon an arbitrary exercise of power and non-application of mind. 4. Learned Government Pleader Smt.M.R.Sreelatha submits that on a perusal of the files, it can be seen that there was a recommendation by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau to initiate disciplinary action against the petitioner. There was a recommendation for registration of a vigilance case also against the petitioner. This was made as early as in May, 2007, when no action was taken, a reminder was sent in June, 2008 and this resulted in the order of suspension. 5. Ext.P15 order refers only to the report of the Additional Director of Agriculture W.P.(C).NO.20740 of 2008 :: 5 :: (Biogas), pursuant to an enquiry conducted into the irregularities found out in Orange and Vegetable Farm at Nelliampathi to Perumatty. It is difficult to appreciate the action of the Government as evidenced by Ext.P15, since it suspends the petitioner more than an year after the report of the Additional Director of Agriculture on 4.5.2007 and more than an year after the vigilance had forwarded a report. If one goes only by the report of the Additional Director of Agriculture, then the enquiry required is one into the alleged irregularities in the functioning of the Orange and Vegetable Farm at Nelliampathi. Such an enquiry alone may not necessitate the suspension of the petitioner at this stage. I do not find any material in the files to indicate that the Government was convinced that an order of suspension of the petitioner is necessary since the enquiry contemplated would otherwise be prejudiced as such. 6. In the result, I am of the view that Ext.P15 order is not the product of proper application of the mind on the part of the W.P.(C).NO.20740 of 2008 :: 6 :: Government. It seems to have been a hasty action on the part of the Government apparently in reacting to a letter from the Director of Agriculture. In the result, Ext.P15 order is quashed. The petitioner shall be reinstated in service within ten days from today. But, it is made clear that it is open to the Government to pass a fresh order, with regard to the departmental enquiry proposed against the petitioner. If the Government, on a perusal of the materials, including the report of the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau , come to the opinion that the suspension of the petitioner as such is necessary for an impartial enquiry into the allegations of irregularities as against him, then this judgment will not stand in the way of the same. Writ petition is allowed as above. Sd/- (V.GIRI) JUDGE sk/ //true copy//