Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

A.DEVADAS versus STATE OF KERALA

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


A.DEVADAS v. STATE OF KERALA - WP(C) No. 17503 of 2006(S) [2006] RD-KL 2347 (4 December 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 17503 of 2006(S)

1. A.DEVADAS
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.T.P.KELU NAMBIAR (SR.)

For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.V.K.BALI The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

Dated :04/12/2006

O R D E R

V.K.Bali,C.J. & S.Siri Jagan,J.

W.P.(C).No.17503 of 2006-S

Dated, this the 4th day of December, 2006



JUDGMENT

V.K.Bali,C.J. (Oral) The petitioner, who is a P.W.D. Contractor engaged in taking up and executing bitumen transportation contract works, has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents 1 to 4 to conduct a free and fair enquiry into the allegations disclosed by Exhibit P2 representation through the Vigilance officials attached to 2nd or 3rd respondents and to initiate appropriate effective steps to identify and disqualify bogus Co-operative Societies from getting contract works from Public Works Department and a further direction to the 1st respondent to frame appropriate Rules or guidelines with adequate precautionary measures to ward off possibility of misusing the contract works awarded to Co-operative Societies and incorporated bodies. W.P.(C).No.17503 of 2006 - 2 -

2. Pursuant to notice issued by this Court, respondents 4 and 5 have filed a statement, paragraph 2 whereof reads as follows:

"In this context it is respectfully submitted that a confidential enquiry is conducted by the Vigilance & Anti Corruption Bureau, Kozhikode and report is submitted to the Government on 5.4.2006 for sanction to conduct a detailed Vigilance enquiry in this matter. The above sanction is to be granted by the Government to the Vigilance & Anti Corruption Bureau. The above facts are submitted for the kind consideration of this Hon'ble Court".

3. In view of the reply statement filed by respondents 4 and 5, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner says that at this stage the Court may only direct the Government to grant permission to conduct a detailed Vigilance enquiry in the matter. There cannot be any objection to the only prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Once, respondents 4 and 5 have made a preliminary enquiry and sought permission from the Government to have a detailed Vigilance enquiry, the W.P.(C).No.17503 of 2006 - 3 - Government, in such circumstances, has to grant permission/sanction. In view of the circumstances as mentioned above and in particular the statement filed by respondents 4 and 5, the Court closes the matter by only directing the Government to grant permission/sanction for holding a detailed Vigilance enquiry as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of four weeks from today. Disposed of accordingly. V.K.Bali Chief Justice S.Siri Jagan Judge vku/-


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.