The Kerala High Court on Monday (October 5) questioned why the members of the Kerala Public Service Commission were not cooperating with the Crime Branch investigation into the alleged irregularities in the examination for recruitment to the State Planning Board.

Justice A. Badharudeen was hearing a plea moved by the KPSC challenging Crime Branch FIR registered to probe into the alleged irregularities. 

"Why you are not cooperating with investigation? You have a case as per the writ petition itself that what you have done is as per the order, etc. Then you go before them, give a statement, produce the documents. You justify your actions in terms of law. You are well aware of the fact that interrogation or questioning of the accused is one among the vital stage of investigation. So you must cooperate. You are being called for getting information, not arrayed as an accused. You are being called as a man knowing the facts of the case," the Court orally said.

While hearing the plea, the Court also orally remarked that public employment is a hope for lakhs of young people and there is a legitimate expectation on the State to preserve its sanctity:

"The hope of the young generation in the State should be protected. They have only one scope, that a government job may be ensured by hard work, because they are expecting a legitimate expectation is there that they may get a job if they may be able to compete the examination and get their rank without any influence, manipulation. That should be kept intact."

The Court also posed two questions on the maintainability of the plea and questioned why the PSC was not going for the remedy available:

"What is the status of a statutory body to file a writ petition? That is the first question. The second question is whether a remedy under S. 482 CrPC/528 BNSS is available?...You are not remediless. You can file a Crl.M.C. raise these contentions, you will get an order. But you want to get such an order in writ petition itself. Why?"

Senior Advocate S. Sreekumar appearing for the Commission argued that there is no crime committed and there was merely a clerical error, which the Kerala Administrative Tribunal (KAT) has permitted to correct.

He explained: "What happened is that the KPSC invited applications for conducting a test to a particular post.... All 228 candidates who appeared for the examination, question nos. 9 to 18 were not forwarded to the examiner for all. Because it was only a computer snag. Because this is done through the computer." 

The Director General of Prosecution T.A. Asaf Ali, on the other hand, argued that there is an 'innovative fraud' at play and the government wanted to investigate the same. It was also submitted that none of the members of the PSC had been arrayed as accused but notices were issued to them. He pointed out that these members did not appear, nor cooperated with the investigation inspite of receipt of notice.

The senior counsel for the PSC then argued that the government order under challenge gave omnibus directions, including sanction to prosecute the members of the body under Prevention of Corruption Act. However, the DGP opposed the contention and stated that he had given a legal opinion that no sanction under Section 17A PC Act was required in this case. He defended the government order by saying that there is only a direction to the Crime Branch to conduct an investigation.

Agreeing with the DGP, the Court orally said: "It is not a sanction under 17A. Sanction under Section 17A contains at least against whom the investigation is even made. For eg. A,B,C alleged to have involved in crime for which a preliminary enquiry is required. That is the format of 17A. Here, the order doesn't say against whom. Order is government noticed malpractice in PSC and this should require an enquiry for which a direction was given. That is a general direction. Enquiry, investigation and its culmination in the form of a report would disclose who are persons actually involved in the corruption. Or at least corruption as alleged. That is a matter of inquiry."

The DGP explained that the investigation is still ongoing and the same has not been stalled by the filing of the present plea.

After hearing the parties for some time, the Court posted the case to Tuesday (October 13), granting time to the State to file counter.

Background

According to the plea, the KPSC issued a notification in 2022 to the post of Chief (Industry & Infrastructure Division) and thereafter, the written exam was conducted. The shortlist with 10 candidates' names was published in February 2025 and one of these persons approached the Kerala Administrative Tribunal pointing out that 10 questions were not evaluated.

Subsequent to the same, the KPSC ordered a preliminary inquiry in June 2026 and the Internal Vigilance Officer submitted a report that an error occurred in the evaluation of one of the papers in the exam. One of the questions in 177 answer scripts and 9 questions in all the 228 answer scripts were not evaluated, it is stated.

The KPSC then decided to take corrective measures as per its Rules of Procedure. The KAT also passed an order permitting the process. In its plea, the PSC has stated that the State government has granted sanction to prosecute its officials under Section 17A of the Prevention Act and based on the same, the Crime Branch has registered an FIR alleging offences under Section 316(5) [Criminal breach of trust] of the BNS, 2023, and Sections 7(c) [Offence relating to public servant being bribed] and 13(1)(a) [Criminal misconduct by a public servant] of the PC Act. Notices were also issued to the staff and members. Challenging these, the Commission has approached the High Court.

The plea seeks to quash the prosecution sanction as well as the FIR registered. The other prayer sought is for a declaration that the KPSC and its staff are not employed in connection with the State's affairs and hence, the State government cannot issue sanction to prosecute them.

The petition is moved by Advocates S. Sreekumar (Sr.), Martin Jose P., P. Prijith, Thomas P. Kuruvilla, Ajay Ben Jose, Manjunath Menon, Harikrishnan S., Anavadya Sanil Kumar, Anjali Krishna, Abhinav P.S., and Adarsh V. Manoj.

Director General of Prosecution T.A. Asaf Ali appeared for the State.

Case No: WP(Crl.) 1497/ 2026

Case Title: Kerala Public Service Commission and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Anr.