G.Vijayanathakurup vs N.R.Rajendran
2021 Latest Caselaw 14139 Ker

            Devan Ramachandran, J.
          -------------------------------
                  R.F.A.No.562 of 2010
          ------------------------------------
          Dated this the 07th day of July, 2021

                            O R D E R

The learned Advocate Commissioner, on

instructions from the learned Administrator, has

prayed that the time frame in the judgment be

extended until the end of September, 2021, because

the latter was incapacitated from acting

effectively for several months in the past on

account of the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions.

Since none of the parties oppose and since I

am of the view that the request is justified, I

extend the time frame in the judgment until

30/09/2021.

Reports dated 12.06.2021 and 25.06.2021

It is a matter of great anguish that the

learned Administrator appointed by this Court is

forced to seek directions against the Secretary-

in-charge on account of his "recalcitrant"

attitude.

2. I do not propose to speak at this stage

on the specifics of the allegations; but the long

and short of it is that the directions issued by

the learned Administrator are either not complied

with or contested by the Secretary-in-charge.

3. I, therefore, deem it necessary to clarify

that the Secretary-in-charge - or even the

Secretary of the Committee - is, at the best, only

a bureaucratic post intended to comply with the

directions of the said Committee or that of the

learned Administrator. Therefore, the Secretary-in-

charge - much less even the Secretary - cannot take

independent decision on such orders and either

contest it or refuse to comply with it.

4. If he has any objection to a particular

decision, he will have to bring it to the notice of

the Committee, who alone will have to deliberate

upon it.

5. However, prima facie, what I seek from

the various documents on record is that the

Secretary appears to contest every direction of the

Administrator, presumably because he feels they are

not right or justified and then refuses to comply

with the same.

6. I must also, however, record that it is

the submission of Shri.G.Sreekumar, learned Senior

Counsel, instructed by Shri.Hariharaputhran,

learned counsel appearing for the Secretary-in-

charge, that his client will not violate any of the

orders of the Administrator and that he will comply

with the same as per law. The learned Senior

Counsel, however, requested that liberty be given

to his client to approach the Committee, if any

decision of the learned Administrator is found to

be not proper.

7. Even if I am to consider the afore

request, I see that there are severe infighting

among the members of the Committee. Automatically,

the question whether they can convene themselves

into a proper meeting is, therefore, a matter of

speculation.

8. I, however, make it clear that if a

meeting of the Committee is required to be

scheduled, nothing stops it from being held;

however, only in terms of the provisions of the by-

laws and the various orders of the Courts.

I, consequently adjourn this matter to be

called on 21/07/2021; within which time, the

Secretary-in-charge will file an affidavit before

this Court showing compliance of all directions of

the learned Administrator.

I also deem it necessary to caution the

Secretary-in-charge that if this is not done by the

next posting date, this Court will consider the

request of the learned Administrator to remove him

and make appropriate alternative arrangements.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JUDGE MC