AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Dr Kauser Edappagath, J
Ext.P5 vigilance enquiry report filed in VE08/2018/EKM of VACB, Ernakulam is under challenge in this writ petition.
I have heard Sri.Umar Farook, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.A.Rajesh, the learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for VACB.
The petitioner filed a petition to the Minister for Registration alleging that one Bhanumathi Radhakrishnan and Philip Mathew took over his land comprised in Sy.Nos.194/5, 195/3, 195/4 and 195/5 of Elamkulam Village by illegal means and using forged documents. The petition was forwarded to Registration Inspector General, Thiruvananthapuram. The Deputy Registration Inspector General, South-Central Region conducted an enquiry. The enquiry revealed that there are substances in the allegations of the petitioner. Since the enquiry was not limited to the registration department alone, it recommended for a vigilance enquiry to find out the accuracy of the deeds, ownership of the property and forgery if any made. Thereafter, on 5/11/2018, the Director, Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau, Thiruvananthapuram ordered to conduct an enquiry. The same was numbered as VA08/2018/EKM. After conducting a detailed enquiry, a report was submitted holding that no offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, 'the PC Act') was involved and recommended departmental action against the erring government officials. According to the petitioner, the said report suffers from various infirmities and it has been prepared only to help the erring officials.
I went through the enquiry report. It appears that the enquiry officer has conducted a detailed enquiry and verified all the relevant records. 23 witnesses were questioned and their statements were recorded. Number of documents from various offices such as Village Office, Sub Registrar Office, Kanayannur Taluk Office, Corporation of Kochi Office, GCDA, Land Tribunal Office etc. were collected and perused. The enquiry revealed that no offence under the PC Act has been made out and the allegation of forgery in the sale deed No.795/1969 of Ernakulam Sub Registrar Office was not sustainable. However, the Enquiry Officer found lapse on the Building Inspector and Assistant Executive Engineer in issuing building permit. Hence, recommendation was made to initiate departmental action against the erring government officials.
On going through the report, it is evident that the dispute is in respect of ownership of the property and the validity of the sale deed, which are to be decided by a civil court. No offence under the PC Act is seen made out. I see no merit in the writ petition. Accordingly, it is dismissed.