1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing Ext.P13 report passed under Section 12 (3) of the Kerala Lok Ayukta Act, 1999, hereinafter referred to as "the Act". The petitioner was the Minister for Transport of the Government of Kerala from 5.9.2004 to 12.5.2006. The first respondent filed a complaint under Section 9 of the Act seeking an investigation into the allegations made in the complaint and for a declaration that the petitioner, being a public servant, shall not hold the post held by him and to make a report to the competent authority under Section 12(3) of the Act. Out of several allegations, the two allegations in Ext.Pl complaint have ended in findings against the petitioner which are as follows:

"i) The 2nd respondent who was then additional private secretary of Minister of Transport forwarded a list of drivers and conductors and their preferred place of transfer to the Corporation. The 3rd and 4th respondents who are Chairman cum Managing Director and Executive Director of KSRTC implicitly implemented the list forwarded by effecting transfers to those drivers and conductors to their place of choice in terms of list forwarded by 2nd respondent under the implied direction of petitioner. The said act of 2nd respondent under the implied direction of 1st respondent amount to interference on the administration of KSRTC which is beyond the power of control envisaged on Government under the Kerala Road Transport Act.

ii) M/s.Anickal Rubbers which is a supplier of tread rubber to KSRTC obtained an award from Industrial Facilitation Council for an amount of Rs.15,84,234/-with interest which is due from KSRTC for the supply made. The petitioner directed to release 25% of the award amount which would come to Rs.5.4 lakhs for the purpose of remittance by the supplier to avert a revenue recovery proceedings against him. The said action of petitioner to release the amount without taking recourse to the legal remedies available against the award is also frowned in the complaint."

2. The allegations in the complaint which culminated in findings against the petitioner are that the second respondent who was the then Additional Private Secretary to Minister for Transport (retired) forwarded a list of drivers and conductors and their preferred places of transfer to the Corporation which was complied with by 3rd and 4th respondents. The said act of the second respondent under the implied direction of the first respondent tantamount to interference in the administration of the KSRTC which is beyond the power of control envisaged on Government under the Kerala Road Transport Act. The second allegation was that M/s.Anickal Rubbers which was a supplier of tread rubber to KSRTC obtained an award from Industry Facilitation Council for an amount of Rs.15,84,234/- with interest which was due from KSRTC for the supply made and on the basis of the direction of the petitioner, 25% of the award amount which would come to Rs.5.4 lakhs was released for the purpose of paying off to avert the revenue recovery proceedings against the supplier without taking recourse to the legal remedies available against the award.

3. Petitioner denied the allegations by filing counter before the Lok Ayukta. The Lok Ayukta after investigation made Ext.P13 report finding that the aforesaid allegations have been substantiated by the complainant. In the report, no recommendation was made by the Lok Ayukta as required under Section 12(3) of the Act. The said report was forwarded to the Governor.

4. Learned senior counsel Sri.O.V.Radhakrishnan appearing for the petitioner assailed the finding in Ext.P13 by contending that the findings recorded against the petitioner were not based on legal evidence and the Lok Ayukta has misdirected in both point of law and facts in finding that the conduct of the office of the petitioner in forwarding Ext,P1 relating to transfer of drivers and conductors was contrary to the provisions contained in KSRTC Act. Learned coun