KAMALU Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard all the learned counsel, Mr. S. Sreekumar for the petitioners, Mr. M. K. Damodaran, the learned Advocate General, for respondents 1 to 3 and Mr. Georgekutty Mathew, for the fourth respondent.

(2.) This petition under Art.226 of the Constitution seeks to challenge the interim order dated 27th, May, 2000 - Ext. P1 passed by the Kerala Lok Ayukta in Complaint No. 108 of 2000. At the top of the said order, the words "Kerala Lok Ayukta" are used to denote the Hon'ble Lok Ayukta and Upa Lok Ayukta acting together in exercise of their powers under sub-s.(1) of S.7 of the Kerala Lok Ayukta Act, 1999 (for short, the Act). In the scheme of the provisions of the sub-s.(1) of S.7, the exercise of power is jointly by the Lok Ayukta and one of the Upa Lok Ayuktas sitting in a Division Bench. For the sake of convenience, they are referred to as the "Kerala Lok Ayukta".

(3.) By way of amendment, further relief prayed for is that the records leading to Ext. P2 complaint dated 23.3.2000, pending before the Kerala Lok Ayukta, should be quashed. The reason for this amendment relief is ground H, taken by way of amendment, that the complaint Ext. P2 filed before the Kerala Lok Ayukta does not come within the purview of S.7(1) of the Act and hence it was not maintainable before the Kerala Lok Ayukta. Under a separate order passed today, we have allowed the amendment petition, C.M.P. No. 30229 of 2000.