'Maligning Judiciary': Kerala High Court Issues Contempt Notice To IAS Officer Over Contemptuous Remarks In Cashew Corp Scam Case

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday (July 8) directed K. Biju IAS, who is in charge of the Cashew Development department, to personally appear before it for allegedly making observations, amounting to ex facie contempt of court, in a cancelled government order.Justice A. Badharudeen also issued notice to the officer as per Rule 9 of the Contempt of Court (High Court of Kerala) Rules, so as to initiate contempt proceedings against him.The Court was considering a contempt plea filed by Kadakampally Manoj after the Principal Secretary of the Industries department Mohammed Hanish repeatedly failed to comply with the High Court's direction to re-consider sanction, which was earlier rejected, in light of its finding that there were prima facie materials to prosecute ex-officials of the State Cashew Development Corporation (KSCDC).Today, when the matter came up, the Advocate General produced two government orders before the Court, dated July 2 and July 6, both of which accorded sanction to the CBI to prosecute against the alleged corrupt ex-officers of KSCDC.Accordingly, sanction has now been granted to prosecute A1 K. Ratheesh, former Managing Director, and A3 R. Chandrasekharan, former Chairman of the KSCDC, who allegedly caused loss of crores of rupees to the Corporation. However, the prior order dated July 2 (Annexure A9), passed by Biju, which allegedly contained disparaging remarks against the Court, was cancelled vide the subsequent order on the advice of the AG to the government.After hearing the parties and perusing the government orders, the Court observed that the AG rightly advised the government to cancel the July 2 order and remove the contents amounting to ex facie contempt of court."The order would depict that the learned Advocate General, who is duty bound to protect the interest of the State and also, the integrity of the judiciary infact rightly advised to withdraw the earlier order and…the AG vide letter…furnished legal opinion to the government that there are contents in the GO that amounts to ex facie contempt of court and hence, the same shall be excluded and fresh GO may be issued. On his advise, GO…dated 6.7.2026 has been issued.""You are not at fault. You have done your duty. On seeing the order as something which could not be produced, you didn't produce it. I fully appreciate that attitude. But the officer could not be spared. He must be proceeded against. Disciplinary action as well as contempt. For issuing this first order. How can an IAS officer say so? How can he blame the entire judiciary?...If he has any grievances, his forum is before the appellate court, not before this court for an order," Justice Badharudeen orally told AG Jaju Babu.The Court also made it clear that the afore Annexure A9 order, which stands cancelled by the subsequent one, cannot be used for any purpose except to proceed against Biju (2nd respondent) in contempt and disciplinary proceedings:"Even though as per GO dated 6.7.2026, A9 was cancelled by the government, the use of the same and operation of the same for any purpose other than for the purpose of proceeding this contempt and for initiating disciplinary action against 2nd respondent, shall remain stayed until further orders."During the course of the contempt proceedings, sanction for CBI prosecution was repeatedly refused and the Court had found the previous officer Mohammed Hanish to be prima facie in contempt of court. Hanish had tendered his unconditional apology before the Court and it was informed that he is no longer in charge of the cashew department. Thereafter, Biju was impleaded and directed to issue sanction as per the Court's directions.Last time, the Advocate General had informed the Court of the State's decision to grant sanction and had sought time to verify the same and produce the order granting sanction. Subsequently, the contempt petitioner had filed petitions before the Court producing the prior sanction order (dated July 2) and pointed out that the same contained disparaging comments against the judiciary. He had further sought a direction to initiate contempt proceedings against K. Biju, who had passed the said order with the disparaging comments.According to the affidavit filed by the contempt petitioner, the prior sanction order was passed even before the AG's submission seeking verification of the government's decision to grant sanction. It is further stated that in the prior order, it was written that sanction was forced to be given because of the orders of the Court and there was no application of mind by the government. It was also pointed out that the copy of the same was given to the accused, who conducted a press conference in Thiruvananthapuram, where he had read out portions of the order containing disparaging comments.The Court also orally remarked that the officer, who issued the prior, cancelled order, has acted in a manner which is per se in contempt of the court. It was further orally said that the officer, and not...

'Maligning Judiciary': Kerala High Court Issues Contempt Notice To IAS Officer Over Contemptuous Remarks In Cashew Corp Scam Case

K. Salma Jennath

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

K. Salma Jennath

'Maligning Judiciary': Kerala High Court Issues Contempt Notice To IAS Officer Over Contemptuous Remarks In Cashew Corp Scam Case

K. Salma Jennath

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

K. Salma Jennath

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers