The Kerala High Court on Wednesday (July 1) refused to interfere with the conferment of Padma Bhushan award to SNDP General Secretary Vellappally Natesan.

A detailed judgment is awaited.

Natesan was conferred with the award by the President just last week for his contributions to social service in Kerala.

The Division Bench of Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. was considering a public interest litigation moved by Sree Narayana Dharma Prabodhana Sarnrakshna Samithi seeking a direction for quashing the conferment of Padma Bhushan to Natesan.

"During the pendency of the petition, respondent No. 4 [Natesan] has been conferred with Padma Bhushan...It has not been alleged that there is no achievement made...Admittedly, there are a few criminal cases pending against the petitioner. In one of the cases, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has stayed further proceedings. In none of the cases, trial has commenced...Moreover, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the Union of India, under the statute and rules for the awards of Bharat Ratna, Padma Vibhushan, Padma Bhushan and Padma Sri, the President has the power to annul and cancel the award of the declaration of any person and thereupon, his name is erased from the register and would be required to surrender the declaration and sannad...If the person is convicted, there is a provision for the Union of India for annulling such Padma Bhushan. At this stage, we do not find any reason to interfere with the conferment of the award of Padma Bhushan," the Court observed, dismissing the PIL.

When the matter came up today, Justice Syam orally said, "Nothing survives…The first prayer is to issue an appropriate order declaring that the conferment of the award on the 4th respondent [Natesan] is arbitrary and illegal and to issue an appropriate order quashing the conferment. Now, both these things have already happened. Conferment has also been done."

However, the petitioner's counsel Advocate D. Anil Kumar pointed out that the conferment was done during the pendency of the present petition and propriety demanded that the Union of India ought to have sought the Court's permission before doing so. He further submitted that the Court is not powerless to turn back the clock and order status quo ante.

He further contended that there is a prayer for a declaration that Natesan is ineligible for getting the award.

The Union's stand was that the conferment of the award is based on the subjective satisfaction of the committee constituted and that the decision is made by the President based on the recommendation. It was also pointed out that there is no conviction in the cases and it is at the FIR stage.

The petitioner responded by saying that there is a host of allegations against Natesan and that trial in one of the cases was stayed by the Supreme Court.

"Doesn't matter...Merely because a criminal complaint is there, that does not make you a convict, doesn't make you an accused...One was stayed by Supreme Court so Supreme Court must have found something prima facie...At any rate, there is possibility of annulling it...It is just like the Representation of People Act. Can a candidate be stopped from filing his candidature merely because a FIR is registered? He is much more. He is representing people. Same analogy. There is a power of annulling it also," Chief Justice Sen orally said.

The plea had stated that Natesan has been arrayed as an accused in several criminal cases, for various offences including cheating, misappropriation of funds, etc. He is also arrayed as an accused in several vigilance cases, including the Microfinance case.

According to the petitioner, awarding of Padma Bhushan to someone like Natesan, who had engaged in embezzlement of money, would erode the public confidence in such awards. It is further alleged that the conferment of Padma Bhushan to Natesan is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

The petitioner trust has thus sought for a declaration that the conferment of the award to Natesan is arbitrary and illegal. Additionally, it has prayed for an order quashing conferment of the award to Natesan.

The petition is moved by Advocate D. Anil Kumar.

Case No: WP(PIL) No. 38/2026

Case Title: Sree Narayana Dharma Prabodhana Sarnrakshna Samithi v. Union of India and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 353