MALAYALAVEDI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Pursuant to our earlier order dtd. 24/1/2023, when the matter was taken up for orders today, an affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent stating as follows in paragraphs 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7:

(2.) In the report submitted before us by the Claims Commissioner, he submits that, while the District Collector has, through a communication dtd. 25/1/2023, informed him of the allotment of a room in the PWD Rest House, Ernakulam, for his functioning pending the repair works to be carried out at the premises in the Revenue Tower Building near Boat Jetty, Ernakulam, he feels that the space allotted to him at the PWD Rest House will not be an appropriate place to function for a public office as the amenities there are relatively poor. He prays that he may be permitted to function from his Chambers at the High Court Chamber Complex for the period of one month from today, by which time, it is expected that the space in the Revenue Tower Building will be made available for his use by the District Administration. He also prays that suitable directions be issued for empowering him to summon existing video and other recordings from the Police Department and other public and private sources to pinpoint the damage and establish nexus with the perpetrators of the damage caused during the Hartal, to call for the copies of all FIR's registered and the mahazars prepared in connection with the incident during the Hartal and to call for the copy of records showing all details of damage caused to the KSRTC.

(3.) Taking note of the affidavit filed on behalf of the 2 nd respondent and the report submitted by the Claims Commissioner, we deem it appropriate to issue the following directions: