Office-Bearer Of Govt Aided 'Social Or Cultural' Institution Is Public Servant Under PC Act: Kerala High Court

Dismissing a plea by the President of Dakshin Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha (Kerala) against an order refusing to discharge him in a CBI case alleging illegal appointments in return for bribes, the Kerala High Court said that an office-bearer of a government-aided institute would qualify as a public servant under the Prevention of Corruption Act. Justice A. Badharudeen upheld the trial court's order framing charges against M.S. Muraleedharan under various provisions of the IPC and the PC Act. The court held that:“As per Section 2(c)(xii) of the P.C. Act, any person who is an office-bearer or an employee of an educational, scientific, social, cultural or other institution, in whatever manner established, receives or having received any financial assistance from the Central Government or any State Government, or local or other public authority, is a public servant. Explanation 1 to Section 2 of the P.C. Act clarifies that, persons falling under any of the sub-clauses are public servants, whether appointed by the Government or not. So the essentials to get the status of a public servant as defined under Section 2(c)(xii) of the P.C. Act is, to be an office-bearer or an employee of an educational, scientific, social, cultural or other institution and the institution either receives or having received any financial assistance from the appropriate Government or any appropriate authority.”The Court noted that prima facie it appeared that the organisation had indeed received government grants, and therefore, its office-bearers fall within the definition of 'public servant' under the Act. Rejecting the argument regarding absence of direct receipt of bribe, the Court observed that there were prima facie materials to show the petitioner's involvement in the alleged conspiracy, forgery of score sheets and tampering of records to secure the appointments.BackgroundAccording to the prosecution, Muraleedharan (3rd accused) along with other office-bearers of the Sabha, entered into a criminal conspiracy to appoint two candidates as teachers at Mahatma Gandhi Public School, Chottanikkara, run by the Sabha, after receiving illegal gratification.It is alleged that an amount of Rs. 4 lakh was paid by one Preethi Anilkumar and Rs. 2 lakh by Judy Joseph through intermediaries, on the promise of appointment as Chemistry and English teachers respectively. The CBI contends that interview score sheets were falsified and original records were destroyed to facilitate these appointments, resulting in the denial of opportunities to meritorious candidates.Appearing for Muraleedharan, counsel argued that the petitioner, being President of the Sabha, cannot be treated as a public servant within the meaning of the Prevention of Corruption Act. It was further submitted that there was no allegation of direct receipt of bribe against the petitioner and that there was no valid sanction to prosecute him under the Act.The CBI opposed the plea, contending that the Dakshin Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha is an educational institution formed under the Dakshina Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha Act, 1964, and had received substantial financial assistance from the Central Government. Relying on Section 2(c)(xii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, the CBI submitted that office-bearers of such institutions receiving government grants come within the ambit of 'public servant'. Official records of grants disbursed between 2008 and 2011 were placed on record to substantiate this claim.Findings:The court took of the details furnished by CBI, and noted that it was evident that the Central Government had granted Rs.31,32,900, 1,77,000, 31,32,900, 1,82,000, 31,32,000, 1,82,000 from the 2008-2009 till 2010-2011. That apart, the Central Government also granted Rs.39,10,360 to the Dakshin Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha, T. Nagar, Chennai, for implementing the programs enlisted herein above, inclusive of the Sabha in Ernakulam, the high court said. "Thus, prima facie, it appears that the Dakshin Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha (Kerala) has been receiving or having received financial assistance from the Central Government and the petitioner and accused Nos.1 and 4 are the office-bearers of the said Sabha, constituted under Section 7(7) of the Sabha Act, would come within the purview of public servants as defined under Section 2(c)(xii) of the P.C. Act. Therefore, the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner asserting that the petitioner would not come under the purview of a public servant under the P.C. Act would not succeed and the said contention is negatived," it said. The court noted that the prosecution had alleged that the accused persons including the petitioner had conducted interview and falsified the score sheet of the interview Board so as to appoint two persons as Chemistry and English teachers respectively in the School run by the Sabha, after receiving bribe from them, excluding the merited candidates from the purview of selection....

Office-Bearer Of Govt Aided 'Social Or Cultural' Institution Is Public Servant Under PC Act: Kerala High Court

Rizmi Lia

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Office-Bearer Of Govt Aided 'Social Or Cultural' Institution Is Public Servant Under PC Act: Kerala High Court

Rizmi Lia

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers