Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: March 25 - March 31, 2024

Nominal Index [Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 201-210]K Venugopal Nair v Manager, Canara Bank 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 201 Dr Abdul Rasheed V State of Kerala 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 202University of Calicut v Ameen Rashid K P 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 203 Dr. MV Narayanan v. The Chancellor, Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit and ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 204Sheeba C K v State of Kerala 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 205Binu @ Kari Binu V State of Kerala & Connected Cases 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 206Rajini and anr. v. Seetha and ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 207P Sreenivasan v Babu Raj & Connected Case 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 208Vimalakumari M K v State of Kerala 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 209Rkec Projects Limited Vs The Cochin Port Trust, The Office Of Chief Engineer And Another. 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 210Judgements/orders this weekCIBIL Rating Not Changed Despite Clearing Loan : Kerala High Court Directs Credit Rating Agency To Ensure Requisite Credit RatingCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 201 Case title: K Venugopal Nair v Manager, Canara BankThe Kerala High Court directed the Trans Union CIBIL Ltd, a credit rating agency, to ensure that the requisite Credit Rating was given to the petitioner since he had no subsisting loans and the earlier loan account had been fully closed.The petitioner approached the High Court to restore his Credit Rating despite no subsisting loans pending. His Credit Rating remained very low despite no subsisting loans. Justice Devan Ramachandran has directed Trans Union Cibil Limited to consider the reports submitted by the Canara Bank regarding the closure of the loan account and to take a decision on the Credit Rating of the petitioner within three weeks. Further, the Court directed the Trans Union Cibil Limited to ensure the petitioner was given sufficient Credit Rating.“The third respondent will ensure that the requisite “Credit Rating” is given to the petitioner and reflected in the online portal within the afore time frames", said the Court.Vigilance Manual Not Statute, Mere Non-Compliance With Directions For Investigators Doesn't Vitiate Probe: Kerala High CourtCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 202Case title: Dr Abdul Rasheed V State of KeralaThe Kerala High Court has observed that the Vigilance Manual is not a statute and was not enacted by the legislature. Thus, it held that mere non-compliance with the Vigilance Manual's directions for investigating officers would not vitiate an investigation.The petitioner was an Assistant Surgeon at Kerala Health Services and was alleged to have committed an offence of criminal misconduct by a public servant under the Prevention of Corruption Act. He alleged that the investigation was conducted by the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) without complying with the directions of the Vigilance Manual. Justice K Babu stated that there was no prejudice caused to the petitioner due to non-compliance with Vigilance Manual directions.University Can't Assume Role Of College Principal For Cancelling Student's Admission Due To Lack Of Attendance: Kerala High CourtCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 203Case title: University of Calicut v Ameen Rashid K PThe Kerala High Court stated that a University cannot assume the role of the College Principal to cancel a student's admission on the allegation of lack of attendance. It stated that the role of the university was only supervisory. The Division Bench comprising Justice A Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen observed thus: “As observed earlier, the University's role in private College is to the limited extent to ensure that University regulations are followed or not. The University cannot assume the role of Principal and direct the College Principal to act on their direction. Absolutely there is no merit in this writ appeal.”Kerala High Court Dismisses Plea By Former VC Of Sree Sankaracharya University Of Sanskrit Challenging His Removal By The ChancellorCase Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 204Case Title: Dr. MV Narayanan v. The Chancellor, Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit and ors.The Kerala High Court has dismissed the appeal of Dr. M. V. Narayanan, Vice Chancellor of Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit against an order of the single judge bench refusing to vacate the order passed by the Chancellor of the university removing the appellant as Vice Chancellor.A division bench of Justices AK Jayasankaran Nambiar and Kauser Edappagathstated that “we are of the view that the impugned order of the learned Single Judge insofar as it is adverse to the appellant herein does not warrant any interference”. A single judge bench of Justice Mohammed Nias CP had previously refused to grant a stay of operation, reasoning that as only one name had been forwarded by the selection committee, it is not only in violation of 7.3 of UGC Regulations, 2018 but also the ratio established in Rajasree's case.Child Facing Prejudice Due To Being Member Of SC Community Can't Be Denied Community Certificate Merely Because Parents Had Inter-Religious Marriage: Kerala...

Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: March 25 - March 31, 2024

Rubayya Tasneem

Tags