RAJU Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have approached this Court impugning Exts.P3 to P6 orders, as per which, they have been mulcted with certain amounts; and they assert that these have been issued without hearing them.

(2.) According to the petitioners, at no point of time has the first respondent - State of Kerala given them an opportunity of being heard, before the amounts shown in these orders were mulcted against them and therefore, that these orders have been issued in violation of the principles of natural justice and the statutory requirements, thus rendering them illegal and unlawful. On such basis, they pray that Exts.P3 to P6 be set aside.

(3.) The learned Senior Government Pleader submits that the challenge against Exts.P3 to P6 are untenable, since the petitioners have chosen not to challenge the quantification per se, but only the covering letters as per which, the proceedings of the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau have been forwarded by the Government to the Panchayat. She points out that Ext.P3 is a covering letter from the Deputy Secretary of the Government to the Local Self Government Department, while Ext.P4 is a letter from the Principal Secretary of the Government to the Director of Panchayats asking that the petitioners be proceeded against for recovery of the amounts. She then says that Ext.P5 is a letter from the Panchayat Director to the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat, while Ext.P6 is the proceedings issued by the Secretary of the said Panchayat to the petitioners to repay the said amounts. She says that the challenge to these orders are immaterial, since the petitioners have not chosen to challenge the report of the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau, based on which these proceedings have been issued. She, therefore, prays that this writ petition be dismissed.