Kerala High Court
J.Sudhakaran vs The State Of Kerala on 5 November, 2025
2025:KER:83761
W.P.(C). No.11443 of 2020
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 / 14TH KARTHIKA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 11443 OF 2020
PETITIONER:
J.SUDHAKARAN
AGED 48 YEARS
S/O. JANARDHANAN, THEJUS ELECTRICAL S,
VAVAKKAVU.K.S, PURAM P.O. KOLLAM 690 518.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.SHAJ
SHRI.JAI GOVIND M.J.
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
2 THE GOVERNMENT PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
PUBLIC ORS (G) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ,
KERALA 695 001.
3 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ELECTRICAL DIVISION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA 695 033.
4 SAVITHA.R.,
AMRITHA VEEDU, PULI SOUTH, EDAKULANAGARA P.O.
THODIYOOR, KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM KERALA 690 523.
GP - SMT. NIMA JACOB
BY ADV SRI.JACKSON JOHNY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
05.11.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:83761
W.P.(C). No.11443 of 2020
:2:
VIJU ABRAHAM, J.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
W.P.(C) No.11443 of 2020
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Dated this the 5th day of November, 2025
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court challenging Exts.P4
and P10 orders.
2. It is averred that the petitioner is an Electrical 'B'
Contractor under the P.W.D. Electrical Department,
Thiruvananthapuram and he has been issued with Ext.P1
registration card. The petitioner along with certain other persons
had protested against the unscientific manner in which B.M. & B.C.
public road works were being conducted at Vavvakkavu-Thazhava
Road. The 4th respondent - Assistant Engineer, PWD Road Works,
Oachia, was in charge of overseeing the said work. Subsequent to
the same, the 4th respondent lodged a complaint before the
Karunagappally Police Station against the petitioner, which lead to
registration of Ext.P2 FIR in Crime No.1053/2019 of
Karunagappally Police Station. Based on the same Exts.P3 and P4
were issued suspending the licence of the petitioner for the reason
that a crime has been registered against the petitioner. The
2025:KER:83761
petitioner would submit that the crime was enquired into and on
finding that the complaint is false, Ext.P5 referral report was filed
before the competent court. The petitioner submits that he has also
preferred a civil suit seeking compensation for the loss and injuries
suffered by him due to the bogus police complaint filed by the 4 th
respondent. By Ext.P6, the 3rd respondent has also recommended to
review the order of suspension of the licence of the petitioner. To
review the order of suspension of licence, the petitioner has filed
W.P.(C)No.6215/2020 before this Court and by Ext.P7 judgment
the matter was directed to be considered and thereupon the
petitioner was issued with Ext.P8 hearing notice, to which Ext.P9
detailed reply was submitted. Without considering any of the
contentions raised by the petitioner, the request of the petitioner
has been rejected as per Ext.P10 by a one line order.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent would
submit that she is not prosecuting the complaint preferred by her.
4. The learned Government Pleader submits that pursuant to
Ext.P7 judgment, a notice was issued to the petitioner and the
objections filed by him were considered and thereafter Ext.P10
order was issued.
5. Heard the rival contentions on both sides.
2025:KER:83761
6. Admittedly, Ext.P4 order was issued suspending the
electrical registration licence of the petitioner solely for the reason
that a crime has been registered against the petitioner. The said
crime was enquired into and on finding that the complaint is false,
Ext.P5 referral report was filed, which has become final. It is on the
basis of the same that the petitioner sought for reviewing the
earlier order suspending the licence and by Ext.P10, without
adducing any reasons, the application has been rejected.
7. Since the suspension of licence was only for the reason that
a crime has been registered against the petitioner and by Ext.P5
referral report, the complaint was found to be false, I am of the
view that respondents 2 and 3 are bound to revoke Ext.P4 order of
suspension. Accordingly, Ext.P4 and P10 are set aside with a
consequential direction to respondents 2 and 3 to see that Ext.P1 is
restored to the petitioner, without any delay, at any rate, within an
outer limit of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
VIJU ABRAHAM
JUDGE
sm/
2025:KER:83761
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11443/2020
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ELECTRICAL B
CONTRACTORS REGISTRATION CARD OF THE
PETITIONER BEARING REGISTRATION NO.
4B/EE/ELE/TVM ISSUED BY THE THIRD
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R. DATED
06/07/2019 IN CRIME NO. 1053/19 OF
KARUNAGAPPALLY POLICE STATION.
EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FILE NO.
PWD/G3/402/2019-PWD DATED 01/08/2019 SENT
BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO THE THIRD
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.
EDT/A2/2408/2019 DATED 16/08/2019 MADE BY
THE THIRD RESPONDENT SUSPENDING THE
LICENSE OF THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE COPY OF REFER CHARGE NO. 212/19
IN CRIME NO. 1053/19 OF KARUNAGAPPALLY
POLICE STATION FILED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR
OF POLICE, KARUNAGAPPALLY POLICE STATION
BEFORE THE HONBLE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT, KARUNAGAPPALLY.
EXHIBIT P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED
30/11/2019 SENT BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT
TO THE SECOND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
06/03/2020 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN
WPC NO. 6215/2020.
EXHIBIT P8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.,
EDT/A2/2408/2019 DATED 06/0/32020 SENT BY
THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P9 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER DATED
20/03/2020 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE
THIRD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P10 THE TRUE COPY OF FILE NO. PWD-G3-
402/2019-PWD DATED 06/04/2020.
