The Kerala Lok Ayukta has no jurisdiction to entertain complaints or conduct investigations concerning matters specified in the Second Schedule of the Kerala Lok Ayukta Act, 1999, specifically including disciplinary actions and service conditions of public servants.

S.MANIKUMAR, C.J.

First petitioner is the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies (General), Thrissur. Second petitioner is the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies and the third petitioner is the Unit Inspector of Circle Union.

2. Reliefs sought for in this writ petition, are as follows:

i) to issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction to quash Exts.P2, P3, P4 and P5.

ii) to declare that the Lok Ayukta has no power, authority or jurisdiction to entertain Ext.P2 complaint and issue notices as evidenced by Exts.P3 and P4 to the petitioners and Ext.P5 order.

3. Petitioners are aggrieved by the proceedings initiated before the Kerala Lok Ayukta in the Complaint No.619/2018, filed by the first respondent – Sri.Ramachandran K, a former President of the Pulakkode Service Co-operative Bank.

4. The Lok Ayukta, by the impugned order dated 23.5.2018 in I.A.No.911/18 in Complaint No.619/2018, issued direction to the second respondent/third petitioner herein (Mr.Pavithran.P.B.) to produce the records pertaining to the departmental enquiry, initiated against the complainant/Sri.Ramachandran.K.

5. Impugned order of the LokAyukta in Complaint No.619/2018 B dated 23rd May 2018 reads thus:

“ORDER

Having regard to the averments in the affidavit which supports this IA and the submissions of Sri.Manikantan learned counsel, we find justification for passing the following interim order.

Issue notice by speed post.

The 2nd respondent is directed to produce the domestic enquiry report submitted by Sri.Hirosh on 16.12.2017 and the annexures thereto and also the entire files in relation to the domestic enquiry conducted by Sri.Hirosh, by the next posting date of the case.

Post on 11.07.2018.”

6. Grounds of challenge are as hereunder:

A. It is submitted that the Kerala LokAyukta is constituted for making enquiries into any action relatable to matters specified in List II or List III of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India taken by or on behalf of the Government of Kerala or certain public authorities in the State of Kerala in certain cases. The LokAyukta being a statutory authority constituted under an enactment, it is to function within the four corners of the powers granted under the Act and the jurisdiction conferred on it and cannot entertain Ext.P3 and issue notice to the petitioners.

B. It is submitted that the statutory provision contained in the Act specifically excluded the conduct of an investigation with reference to the matters specified in Second Schedule to the Act and that going by the Second Schedule, action taken in respect of appointment, removal, pay, discipline, superannuation or other matters relating to conditions of service of public servants but, not including actions relating to claims for pension, gratuity, provident fund or to any claims which arises on retirement, removal or termination of service; are specifically excluded. Hence it is submitted that the matter which was specifically excluded cannot be investigated by the LokAyukta.

C. It is submitted that the issuance of notice or conducting investigation cannot be ordered by mere asking. The LokAyukta before issuing a notice should consider as to whether the complaint is one which can be investigated by it or not. The LokAyukta in the facts and circumstances of the case ought not have entertained the complaint. This Hon'ble Court in the decision reported in 2000 (3) KLT 227 has categorically laid down the law that;

“The scheme of the above definitions will make it clear that it is the Kerala Lok Ayukta who may inv