Kerala High Court Urges Integrity Among IAS Officers
The Kerala High Court has underscored the importance of integrity among Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officers, advising them against acting as instruments of the government to further illegal activities. This announcement came during a hearing on Friday concerning the alleged Kerala State Cashew Development Corporation (KSCDC) corruption case.
Justice A Badharudeen Rejects Apology Affidavit
Justice A Badharudeen dismissed an apology affidavit submitted by IAS officer K Biju, who serves as the Secretary of the State’s Industries Department. The affidavit was filed amidst contempt of court proceedings linked to the KSCDC scandal. The court found the affidavit lacking in an unconditional apology and instructed Biju to submit a revised affidavit.
Court Criticizes Government Influence
In his remarks, Justice Badharudeen advised the IAS officer against becoming a “weapon of the government,” emphasizing the responsibility of officers to serve the public rather than facilitate governmental illegalities. He invoked Napoleon’s words, “Cowards die many times before their death but brave only once,” to underline the importance of courage and integrity.
Contentious Orders and Contempt Proceedings
The legal issue arose from the government’s repeated non-compliance with court orders to reassess its previous refusals to sanction the prosecution of former KSCDC officials in the cashew scam case. On July 8, the court observed that IAS officer K Biju had issued two conflicting orders regarding prosecution sanctions. The initial order implied the court directed the sanction, which was later revised after objections were raised.
Judicial Critique of Executive Actions
Justice Badharudeen expressed concern over the first prosecution sanction order, suggesting it aimed to undermine the judiciary. He clarified that the court had only directed a reconsideration of the decision, allowing the government to either grant or deny sanction based on the court’s findings.
More Read
Accountability for Contradictory Orders
The judge emphasized accountability for executive officers who issued contradictory orders, stating they appeared to support the accused. He stressed that the officers, not the government, should bear responsibility.
Further Steps and Court’s Warning
Contempt of court proceedings were initiated, compelling Biju to attend a July 10 hearing. The court found his affidavit inadequate and warned him against defying court authority. Justice Badharudeen instructed Biju to submit a fresh affidavit, including an acknowledgment of reviewing prosecution records and a justification for the issuance of the sanction.
Principal Secretary Also Under Scrutiny
Principal Secretary Mohammed Hanish also faces contempt proceedings. The court inquired about his involvement in the prosecution sanction orders, warning both officers of their duty to act independently of governmental pressure.
More Read
Background of the Cashew Scam Case
The case stems from a 2015 Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) inquiry into alleged corruption in raw cashew procurement by the KSCDC, initiated under the High Court’s direction. The CBI sought prosecution sanctions against former KSCDC chairman R Chandrasekharan and managing director KA Ratheesh. Despite initial refusals by the state government, a single judge directed a fresh consideration, which was again denied.
Contempt Case Developments
In April, the High Court identified a prima facie case of contempt when the state declined prosecution sanction for the third time. The court ordered Principal Secretary Hanish to appear in contempt proceedings, a decision later upheld by a Division Bench.
