JALADHARAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant, the learned Senior Counsel for the third respondent, Lok Ayukta; and the learned Government Pleader. The writ petitioner is the appellant. The situation in hand is a direct result of the enormous delay on the part of the Government in formulating the service rules for the staff of the Lok Ayukta.

(2.) Sometime in 1999 the institution of Lok Ayukta came into being in the State of Kerala. Following that, the office of Lok Ayukta had to be manned by appropriate staff. Services were lent including by offering staff of High Court of Kerala. The writ appellant/writ petitioner is one among them.

(3.) The fact of the matter remains that even as of now, the service rules as far as the Lok Ayukta staff are concerned had not been formulated. With the passage of time, it became necessary to have the post of Additional Registrar. The method of recruitment to that post was as discernible from the Government orders that govern the field. It could be by deputation, promotion etc. Since nobody was available for deputation and there was no service rules coming into force, the Lok Ayukta repeatedly wrote to the Government to finalise the recruitment rules. With passage of time, the institution of Lok Ayukta found it extremely difficult to sustain its activities through support from requisite personnel.