Rafeeq Babu M.S vs The Vigilance & Anti-Corruption ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 10935 Ker

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                         PRESENT
      THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
 THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 4TH KARTHIKA,
                          1945
                 WP(C) NO. 33455 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
         RAFEEQ BABU M.S.
         AGED 48 YEARS
         S/O LATE MUHAMMED SALIH, SECRETARY, FRIENDS OF
         NATURE CHARITABLE SOCIETY (REG. NO: 212/07),
         RESIDING AT 36/208, 'HARITHA', MANGAT, CALICUT
         AIRPORT (PO), KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DT. KERALA
         STATE, PIN - 673647
         BY ADVS.
         T.K.AJITH KUMAR
         HARITHA HARIDAS


RESPONDENTS:
    1    THE VIGILANCE & ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU
         REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, PMG, OPP: VIKAS
         BHAVAN BUS DEPOT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
         PIN - 605010
    2    UNION OF INDIA
         REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF
         DRINKING & SANITATION, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
         MINISTRY OF JAL SHAKTI, C WING, 4TH FLOOR,
         PANDIT DEENDAYAL ANTYODAYA BHAVAN, CGO COMPLEX,
         LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110003
    3    STATE OF KERALA
         REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, WATER RESOURCES,
         GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
         PIN - 695001
    4    THE CHIEF ENGINEER
         KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, JALA BHAVAN,
         VALLAYAMBALAM PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
         PIN - 695010
    5    THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER
         KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, 512/19, KOTTAKUNNU RD,
         UP HILL, MALAPPURAM DT., PIN - 676505
 WPC 33455/23
                            ..2..


    6     KONDOTTY MUNICIPALITY
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KONDOTTY PO,
          MALAPPURAM DT., PIN - 673638
          BY ADV MINI GOPINATH -CGC .

          SRI. V.V.JOSHY, SC
          SRI.K.A.Jaleel - SC
          SMT.Vidya Kuriakose- GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 26.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 WPC 33455/23
                                  ..3..



                           JUDGMENT

The petitioner makes an allegation that a centrally

sponsored Drinking Water Project, being implemented with

contribution by the Government of Kerala, is not being carried on

as per approved design and specifications; and imputes that this

is on account of corruption and deliberate action to divert the

project's fiscal outlay to vested interests. He says that he has

preferred Ext.P3 representation before various Authorities,

including the Secretary, Water Resources Department,

Government of Kerala; and seeks that an investigation be

directed to be ordered on the same, under the aegis the 1st

respondent - Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau, to unearth the

deleterious tendencies being infused into the project in question.

He vehemently asserts that, as is evident from Ext.P1

photographs, the pipes used for the major project are evidently

so small that, it cannot achieve the purpose for which it is

designed for, and same is contrary to the approved design and

specifications.

2. However, Smt.Vidya Kuriakose - learned Government

Pleader, in response to the afore submissions of Sri.T.K.Ajith WPC 33455/23 ..4..

Kumar - learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that, on

receiving similar complaints, a preliminary investigation was

launched by the 1st respondent, to find that they are without any

basis. She submitted that, therefore, the attempt of the

petitioner is only to impel allegations, which are unsubstantiated;

and thus prayed that this writ petition be dismissed.

3. Smt.Mini Gopinath - learned Central Government

Counsel, submitted that, though Government of India contributes

to the Project, its implementation is done by the Government of

Kerala; and therefore, that 2nd respondent has no role to play at

this stage. She added that, in any event, the competent Ministry

is not the Department of Drinking and Sanitation - which has

been arrayed by the petitioner; but the Department of Housing

and Urban affairs, before which no complaint has been preferred

by him.

4. Sri.V.V.Joshi - learned Standing Counsel for the Kerala

Water Authority (KWA), also took the stand that the allegations

made in this writ petition are wholly baseless; and asserted that

the work is being proceeded with as per design, making sure that

every imperative requirement is conformed and implemented.

5. Sri.K.A.Jaleel - learned counsel appearing for the 6 th WPC 33455/23 ..5..

respondent - Kondotty Municipality, submitted that his client has

no role to play in the controversy since, the work is now being

implemented by the Government of Kerala, under the aegis of the

'KWA'.

6. When I evaluate and consider the afore rival

submissions, it is evident that, going by the allegations in this

writ petition, this Court will not be in a position to accede to the

relief prayed by the petitioner for a direction to the 1 st respondent

to cause an enquiry. This is because, any such action will have to

be preceded by establishment of relevant criteria, which, at the

moment, is not available for this Court to act upon.

7. Obviously, therefore, the only relief that can be

granted to the petitioner at this stage - particularly because he

seems to be projecting a public cause - is to direct the competent

authority of the Government of Kerala to take up his Ext.P3

representation and dispose it of, after hearing all necessary

parties.

8. In fact, it is conceded at the Bar by the learned

counsel for the respondents that such a course can be adopted,

particularly because there is nothing for any of them to hide in

the execution of the Project in question. WPC 33455/23 ..6..

In the afore circumstances, I allow this writ petition, to the

limited extent of directing the competent Authority of the 3 rd

respondent - State of Kerala, to take up Ext.P3 representation of

the petitioner's and dispose of the same, after hearing him, as

also any other person or officer, who may be interested of being

consulted or heard; thus culminating in an appropriate order and

necessary action thereon, as expeditiously as is possible, but not

later than two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment.

Needless to say, since I have not entered into the merits of

any of the contentions of the parties, all of them are left open,

including the liberty of the petitioner to move the competent

Authority of the Union of India appropriately, if so found

warranted in future.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JUDGE ACR WPC 33455/23 ..7..

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 33455/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit-P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS CONNECTING 160MM PIPE TO 90MM PIPE WITH 30 MM PIPE.

Exhibit-p2 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH, WHICH WOULD SHOW THAT THE HOUSE CONNECTION IS GIVEN FROM THE PIPELINE WITHOUT COVERING THE PIPELINE AND WITHOUT TESTING.

Exhibit-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 26.9.2023 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE RESPONDENTS 2 TO 6.

Exhibit-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 03.07.2023 SENT BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM TO THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MALAPPURAM P.H. DIVISION.