Irregular allotment of SC/ST reserved property without following prescribed procedures leads to illegality; strict adherence to government provisions necessitated for future allotments.

JUDGMENT :

A. BADHARUDEEN, J.

1. Accused Nos.2, 3, 4, 5 and 7 in C.C.No.02/2017 on the files of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, (Vigilance), Kottayam, have filed Crl.M.C.No.1116/2025 and the prayers are as under:

(i) Quash Annexure-E F.I.R. in Crime V.C.1 of 2013 of VACB, Kottayam and Annexure-F, final report and all proceedings in C.C.No.2 of 2017 of Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Kottayam;

(ii) Issue such other orders as may be necessary in the interest of justice.

2. W.P.(C).No.38420/2024 has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and the prayers are as under:

I. Issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction, to quash and set aside the order at Ext.P5 considering the Ext.P2 vigilance Report.

II. Issue a writ or order in mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction, and order commanding the respondents 1 and 2, to re-allot the Room No.10 and also to sanction an additional room for the said SC/ST community on the basis of Ext.P1 circulars.

III. Issue a writ or order in mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction, and order commanding the respondents 1 and 2 to take appropriate action against the respondent No.3 & 4 for the unauthorized sub-letting of the Room No.10 reserved for SC/ST community.

IV. To dispense with filing of English translation of documents in Malayalam.

V. To grant such other relief as may be prayed for and as the Court deems fit to grant.”

3. Heard Sri.S.Sreekumar, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.1116/2025 and for the 4^th respondent in W.P.(C)No.38420/2024; Sri.P.Dalbi Emmanuel, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.(C)No. 38420/2024; and Sri.Ajit Joy, learned Standing Counsel for Kottayam Municipality appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 in W.P.(C)No.38420/2024. Though notice was duly served on the 3^rd respondent in W.P.(C)No.38420/2024, there is no appearance on his behalf. Also heard the learned Special Public Prosecutor.

4. First of all, I am inclined to address the contentions raised in the writ petition. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are as under:

1. The petitioner belongs to the Scheduled Caste (SC) community. The petitioner is aggrieved by the irregular allotment by the 1st and 2^nd respondent, of Room No.10, reserved for SC/ST community in Rajiv Gandhi Shopping Complex, (Complex) Kottayam owned by the respondent No.1 herein. The 3^rd respondent is the present licensee of the said room, but the possession and enjoyment of the same for the last so many years is by one Jewellery named Josco Jewellery.

2. That as per circulars of the government, when the Panchayats/Municipalities/Development Authorities construct shopping complexes and give the same on rent to the public, 10% of the same ought to be reserved for SC/ST community. The procedure prescribed by the government for allotment of reserved rooms in shopping complexes are as per government circulars bearing No. 15735/C3/90/ LSG dated 08/05/1990, 19217/C2/91/LSG dated 10/05/1991 and 3480/D3/96/LSG dated 12/08/1996. That as per the above circulars the government has very clearly stated the methods /procedure of allotment being as follows:-

(a) 10% of the rooms in all shopping complexes are strictly to be reserved for SC/ST community.

(b) Such reserved rooms should not be allotted by public auction, or by quotations having competitive nature. The rent ought to out fix by taking the average rent received fro