Disposed

Varghese Chacko v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC2 Dec 2019WP(C)/23277/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition regarding delay in granting prosecution sanction, the court held the Land Revenue Commissioner is the competent authority. The petitioner is permitted to approach the commissioner with a certified copy of this judgment, who must decide within a month.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to prefer application for sanction to prosecute officers before the additional third respondent (Land Revenue Commissioner).

Varghese Chacko Vs State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

¶4

MONDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.23277 OF 2019(H)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

VARGHESE CHACKO GEORGE NIVAS, VENGAVILA THEKKETHIL, KUNNIDA, KURUMBAKKARA P.O, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 695

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.K.N.GOVINDANKUTTY MENON

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001

¶11

2 THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT. VIGILANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001

¶12

3 ADDL R3: THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER GOVERNMENT OF KERALA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶13

(ADDL.R3 IS IMPLEADED SUO MOTU AS PER JUDGMENT DATED 02.12.2019)

¶14

SMT.PRINCY XAVIER - GP

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.12.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C).No.23277 OF 2019(H)

¶17

¶18

W.P.(C) No.23277 of 2019

¶19

J U D G M E N T

¶20

The Land Revenue Commissioner, Government of Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram is impleaded suo motu as the additional third respondent in the writ petition.

¶21

Ext.P1 is an application preferred by the petitioner before the Government seeking sanction to prosecute the officers of the Government referred to in the writ petition. The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition concerns the delay on the part of the Government in taking a decision on Ext.P1 application.

¶22

When the matter was taken up today, the learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submitted that the appropriate authority to grant sanction in relation to the officers referred to in Ext.P1 is the additional third

¶23

respondent and not the Government. According to the learned Government Pleader, it is on account of the said

¶24

WP(C).No.23277 OF 2019(H)

¶25

¶26

reason that a decision was not taken on Ext.P1 application.

¶27

It is seen that Ext.P1 is an application preferred by the petitioner as early as on 25.09.2018. If as a matter of fact, the Government is not the competent authority, the matter should have been informed to the petitioner so as to enable him to prefer an application before the competent authority for sanction. Be that as it may, insofar as it is now revealed that the Government is not the competent authority to grant sanction to prosecute the officers named in the application, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition permitting the petitioner to prefer an application before the Land Revenue Commissioner, the additional third respondent, for sanction to prosecute the officers mentioned in the writ petition. Ordered accordingly. In the peculiar facts of this case, it is also directed that if the petitioner prefers an application with the certified copy of this judgment before the additional third respondent as permitted, the

¶28

WP(C).No.23277 OF 2019(H)

¶29

¶30

same shall be considered by the said respondent in accordance with law, within a month thereafter with notice to the petitioner.

¶31

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.

¶32

¶33

WP(C).No.23277 OF 2019(H)

¶34

¶35

APPENDIX

¶36

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶37

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 25.9.2018.

¶38

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL

Varghese Chacko v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Varghese Chacko 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S. Athulya Architects and Associates Vs Ahalia International Foundation

Rajeev G Vs R.Girija

C.J.Anto Vs Indus Ind Bank

Master Gautham Prasanth Vs State of Kerala

Modern Steels Vs Kerala Chumattu Thozhilali Union

Sajeer Vs State of Kerala