N R GOPALAKRISHNAN Vs. P RAMAN NAMBOODIRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I do not think that discipline in a Government office should erose to such an extent as to encourage a Government servant to file a complaint in a criminal court alleging that entries in a confidential report made by his " superior officer are defamatory.

(2.) The petitioner is a Superintendent of the R.M.S. Division and the respondent is the Head Sorting Assistant, a subordinate of the Superintendent. The petitioner as an authority competent to make entries in the Confidential report of the respondent stated that the respondent did not have adequate grasp of the subject, he was "argumentative" and described him as "defiant" and 'not very devoted to duty" and stated that he was "not industrious''. It was added further that he was not "trustworthy" and "is not a very satisfactory worker''.

(3.) The respondent alleged that these statements made were per se defamatory and that they were communicated not according to the procedure prescribed under the administrative manual, but were typed and forwarded to the Sub Record Officer, Badagara, the immediate superior of the respondent. He also alleged that in the Office of the SRO., Badagara, a class IV employee who carried it to get the stamp impressed, had also seen the communication. A complaint was, therefore, filed alleging that the Superintendent was guilty of the offence under S.500 IPC.