NARAYANA MURTHI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is against an order of Vaidialingam, J. dismissing an application to quash the Government's order compulsorily retiring the appellant from service.

(2.) IN 1947, K. C. Kurien, Kalarickal, Kottayam, had a contract with the Government for extraction of timber from Tract No. III of the Vandanmedu Range in Peermade Taluk. After completing the work, he petitioned before the Conservator of Forests on June 7, 1949 , complaining of loss and requesting grant of a compensatory contract, without calling for tenders, for extraction of timber in a portion of the Cardamom Hill Reserve in the same range. As that did not find favour with the then Conservator, he filed a petition on October 7, 1949 , before the Minister for Forests for compensation. That application was forwarded to the Conservator for remarks and proposals. The Conservator reported on March 16, 1950, that about 1000 trees on a portion of the Cardamom hill Reserve in the Vandanmedu Range were fit for extraction and recommended the work to be given to Kurien without calling for tenders in competition. The same day he directed the Divisional Forest Officer to mark the exploitable trees over a well-defined area in the Cardamom Hill Reserve and to submit the marking list and sketch of the area chosen. While marking trees in pursuance of the above direction the Divisional Forest Officer found that 955 trees were available for extraction in the Vandanmedu Range and that about 2000 good trees were similarly available in the adjoining Poopara Range of his Forest Division which may also be given to Kurien for extraction as the area was being surveyed for leasing out to cultivators under the Grow More Food Scheme. He described the portion of the Poopara Range thus proposed to be included in the grant of work to Kurien as bounded on the west by the Kanchiyar, on the north and east by the Kallyanapara Ridge and on the south by Ayyappancoil-Pulimala Road, it being about 8 sq. miles in extent. The Conservator recommended, and thereupon the Government sanctioned the grant of contract to Kurien for felling and collecting 955 trees marked in the Vandanmedu Range, mentioning therein that, after completion of that work, he will be given the works in the remaining portion in the Poopara Range on rates then found reasonable by the Government. Accordingly an agreement was executed between K. C. Kurien and the then divisional Forest Officer on August 8, 1950, with a plan attached thereto showing the areas concerned in both in the Vandanmedu and the Poopara Ranges.

(3.) ON November 9,1956, charges were framed against the appellant for fraud and dishonesty committed by him in the discharge of his duties in the making of the agreement of March 24,1954, and in the marking of a larger number of trees allowed to be worked down by the contractor. (There were also other charges of misconduct; but we are not concerned with them here, as they were found not to have been proved at the enquiry ). The appellant was placed under suspension on November 13, 1956. Mr. Justice Kumara Pillai was appointed Commissioner to enquire into the charges. With the President's sanction, his Lordship commenced enquiry on January 5,1957. 38 witnesses were examined and a large number of documents were exhibited. The Commissioner submitted his report, Ext. P-6, on July 25,1957, finding the appellant guilty of the above-said charges. The Government accepted that report, found the appellant guilty and issued Ext. P-7 notice on April 17,1958, to show cause why be should not be dismissed from service with effect from the date he was placed under suspension. After considering his explanation, as also the advice given by the Public Service Commission on consultation on the matter, the Government ordered on August 1, 1961, by Ext. P-8, the compulsory retirement of the appellant from service with effect from the date of his suspension, November 13,1956. He filed O. P. No. 2458 of 1961, under Art. 226 & 227 of the constitution, to quash the said order, Ext. P-8, and for consequential reliefs. Vaidialingam, J. dismissed the same without costs. This appeal is against the learned judge.