Partly allowed

Prasanna Mohan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC10 Jan 2018WP(C)/18527/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of a writ petition filed by the dependants of a deceased Special Public Prosecutor, directing the government to release arrears sanctioned in 2018 and to consider enhancing remuneration based on the deceased's recommendations.

What did the court decide?

Directing 5th respondent to disburse sanctioned amount of Rs.67,250 equally to petitioners, and 1st respondent to consider enhancement of remuneration within three months.

Prasanna Mohan Vs State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY 2018 / 20TH POUSHA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 18527 of 2017

¶6

-----------------------

¶7

PETITIONERS :

¶8

1. PRASANNA MOHAN, AGED 62 YEARS, W/O. ADV.(LATE) C.P. MOHAN MENON, LAKSHMI, KALATHIPARAMBIL LANE, PERUVARAM ROAD, NORTH PARAVOOR, PIN - 683 513, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶9

2. MRS. LAKSHMI MOHAN, AGED 33 YEARS, D/O. ADV.(LATE) C.P. MOHAN MENON, LAKSHMI, KALATHIPARAMBIL LANE, PERUVARAM ROAD, NORTH PARAVOOR, PIN - 683 513, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶10

3. GOPIKA CHETHAN, AGED 28 YEARS, D/O. ADV.(LATE) C.P. MOHAN MENON, LAKSHMI, KALATHIPARAMBIL LANE, PERUVARAM ROAD, NORTH PARAVOOR, PIN - 683 513, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADVS.SRI.R.PADMARAJ

¶12

SRI.P.J.ANTONY JOSEPH MARIADAS SRI.R.AJITH KUMAR [V.K.EDOM] SRI.A.ADARSHACHANDRAN

¶13

RESPONDENTS :

¶14

1. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY ADDL. CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME(C) DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001.

¶15

2. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (FINANCE) FINANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVT.OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001.

¶16

3. ADDL. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, CBCID, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶17

WP(C).No. 18527 of 2017 (M)

¶18

4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CBCID (STATS), POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶19

5. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,ERNAKULAM, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, PIN - 682 030.

¶20

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10-01-2018,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

¶22

WP(C).No. 18527 of 2017 (M)

¶23

APPENDIX

¶24

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶25

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF GOVT. ORDER GO(RT.)NO. 2755/2011/HOME DATED 13.09.2011.
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO. U2/68438/2011 DATED 28.10.2011 OF STATE POLICE CHIEF.
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(RT.)NO. 1624/2014/HOME DATED 10.06.2014.
EXHIBIT P3 (A)	TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(RT.)NO. 757/2014/HOME DATED 04.03.2014.
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS NO. M1-49057/11 DATED 09.03.2015 OF DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM.
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE RESIGNATION LETTER DATED 09.11.2015 BY ADVOCATE (LATE) SRI. C.P.MOHAN MENON.
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 06.03.2016 BY THE PETITIONERS TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO. 231/16/E/DGP DATED 29.04.2016 OF THE DIRECTOR OF PROSECUTION (ADMN) TO THE DC, ERNAKULAM AND DISTRICT GOVT. PLEADER, ERNAKULAM.

¶26

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

P.V.ASHA, J.

W.P(C) No.18527 of 2017-M

¶32

Dated this the 10^th day of January, 2018

¶33

JUDGMENT

¶34

The petitioners are the widow and children of late Advocate C.P.Mohan Menon, who was the Special Public Prosecutor for conduct of 11 series of cases in Crime No.346 of 2011 of North Paravoor Police Station, i.e, in Paravoor Sex Scandal cases which were tried before the Special Court (Second Additional Sessions Court, Ernakulam) having the following case numbers:

¶35

SC. No.76/2012, 2. SC. No.323/2012, 3. SC. No.432/2012, 4. SC. No.18/2013, 5. SC. No.19/2013, 6. SC. No.20/2013, 7. SC. No.170/2013, 8. SC. No.172/2013, 9. SC. No.624/2013, 10. SC. No.325/2014 and 11. SC. No.405/2014.

¶36

Late C.P.Mohan Menon was appointed as Special Public Prosecutor as per Ext.P1 order issued on 13.09.2011. The petitioners claim that the State Police Chief had as per Ext.P2 letter recommended payment of Rs.1 lakh as fees in Ext.P2 letter dated 28.10.2011 addressed to the

¶37

¶38

W.P(C) No.18527 of 2017-M

¶39

Additional Chief Secretary to Government. Subsequently late C.P.Mohan

¶40

Menon had submitted a representation on 5.1.2013 for enhancement of the remuneration. The Government thereafter issued Ext.P3 order on 4.3.2014 according sanction for payment of enhanced remuneration for the conduct of the prosecution in SC.No.323/2012 fixing the advocate fee as Rs.60,000/and expenses as Rs.11,500/-, i.e, @ Rs.500/- for 23 days. Based on Ext.P3 order, the District Collector had issued Ext.P4 proceedings according sanction for drawal of a sum of Rs.68,500/- to the late Special Public Prosecutor. While so, the Prosecutor expired on 28.01.2016, due to cancer. The petitioners submitted a representation on 6.3.2016 requesting to release the arrears of fee payable to the deceased Public Prosecutor in the name of the 1^st petitioner. The writ petition was filed thereafter.

¶41

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned

¶42

Government Pleader.

¶43

The learned Government Pleader has made available a copy of G.O(Rt) No.21/18/Law dated 6.1.2018 by which the Government accorded sanction for payment of remuneration of Rs.67,250/- to the deceased towards the prosecution of the Sessions Cases in the Additional Sessions Court, Ernakulam.

¶44

In the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of

¶45

¶46

W.P(C) No.18527 of 2017-M

¶47

directing the 5^th respondent to see that the amount sanctioned as per order dated 6.1.2018 is disbursed to the petitioners equally.

¶48

The learned counsel for the petitioners points out that the deceased had already requested for enhancement of remuneration pointing out the effort he had made for effective prosecution. Based on that Ext.P3 order was passed. It is pointed out that subsequent to Ext.P3 order also the deceased had submitted representation for enhancement of remuneration.

¶49

In the above circumstances, there shall be a direction to the 1^st respondent to consider the question of enhancement which is referred to in Ext.P2 with reference to the recommendation made by the State Police Chief in Ext.P2 letter. This shall be done within a period of three months.

¶50

Sd/- (P.V.ASHA, JUDGE)

¶51

rtr/

Prasanna Mohan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prasanna Mohan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A.Nazar Kunju Vs Ashok Kumar Singh

Prem P Mahesh Vs S.Raimon

P Aji Nair Vs Kerala State Electricity Board Limited

Mohana Kumar.K.P. Vs State of Kerala

K.S.Cherian Vs the Kerala Agro Machinery Corporation Lt

Smt.Sobhana Kumari a Vs State of Kerala