NATARAJAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) How the power of the Governor under S. 17(2) of the Right to Information Act ('RTI Act' in short) is to be exercised, for suspending the Chief Information Commissioner or the State Information Commissioner, pending inquiry by the Supreme Court on a Reference and what are the essential ingredients to be satisfied for the same, form the subject matter of consideration in this Writ Petition. The petitioner herein joined the Kerala State Police Service in the year 1985 and got elevated to the Indian Police Service (Kerala Cadre) in 1995. While working as Dy. Inspector General of Police holding the post of Vigilance Officer in the Department of Co-operation, he voluntarily retired from service on 9.2.2011 and was appointed by the Governor of the State as State Information Commissioner vide Ext. P1 order dated 21.2.2011. The petitioner assumed charge as the State Information Commissioner on 23.4.2011 and was continuing as above.

(2.) While so, there were allegations that the petitioner was frequently interacting with one Mr. Kunjan, Dy. Superintendent of Police, who was investigating the vigilance case registered against Mr. V.S. Achuthanandan, Leader of the Opposition, Kerala Legislative Assembly and the former Chief Minister of Kerala, in the matter of assignment of some Government Land to a relative of the latter. It was alleged that the aforesaid Investigating Officer was contacted by the petitioner on many a time, and the former was allegedly instructed to absolve Mr. V.S. Achuthanandan from the insinuation/accusation. It is seen from the pleadings and proceedings, that the Additional Director General of Police (Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau) was required to check the correctness of the information and to submit a 'Quick Verification Report'. Verification was conducted and based on the report, the Government put up the matter before the Governor to take appropriate action against the petitioner.

(3.) The report and other relevant proceedings were considered by the Governor, who found that there was prima facie a case against the petitioner and that if the same was proved, the petitioner was liable to be removed from the office. It was in the said circumstance, that the matter was decided to be referred to the Hon'ble Supreme Court as contemplated under S. 17(1) of the Right to Information Act. In view of the said decision taken on 9.11.2012, the petitioner was placed under suspension vide Ext. P3 order dated the same day, and it was served on the petitioner on 12.11.2012 by special messenger deputed from the Kerala Raj Bhavan. Ext. P3 order of suspension is under challenge in this Writ Petition on many a ground, including maintainability. It is stated that Ext. P2 representation preferred by the petitioner on the previous day was not considered by the Governor and no opportunity of hearing was given to him before passing Ext. P3.