Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: November 14 to November 20, 2022

Nominal Index [Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 588-602]Dr. K.K. Vijayan v. The Chancellor and Dr G. Sadasivan Nair v. State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 588Milan Dorich v. State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 589Rishada Haris K.P. v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 590Bennat Tom V. v. Calicut University & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 591K.P. Ramachandran Nair & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 592Dr Joseph Skariah v. Vice-Chancellor (Selection Committee Chairman) 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 593Omassery Labour Contract Co-Operative Society & Ors v. Mukkam Municipality & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 594State of Kerala Rep. by Chief Secretary & Ors. v. Ravi Parameswara Raja 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 595 Sofikul Islam v. State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 596Akshay@Ajeesh@Ananthu v. State of Kerala & Anr and Akhila A.P. @ Lalu & Anr v. State of Kerala & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 597K C Antony Versus Principal Commissioner 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 598 Santhosh Kumar Nair v. Suresh P. Sreedharan & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 599Khaledur Rahman v. State of Kerala & Anr.2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 600Special Tahsildar V. Union Of India 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 601 K. Surendran v. State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 602Orders/Judgments This WeekKerala High Court Quashes KUFOS VC Dr Riji John's Appointment, Asks Chancellor To Form New Search CommitteeCase Title: Dr. K.K. Vijayan v. The Chancellor and Dr G. Sadasivan Nair v. State of KeralaCitation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 588The Kerala High Court on Monday quashed the appointment of the Vice-Chancellor of Kerala University of Fisheries and Ocean Studies (KUFOS), Dr. K. Riji John.The division bench consisting of Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly said that the constitution of the selection committee and its recommendation in John's case was illegal. ...we have no hesitation to hold that the selection of Dr. K. Riji John as the Vice Chancellor of the Kerala University of Fisheries and Ocean Studies, overlooking the UGC Regulations, 2018, cannot be sustained under law. We are also of the view that the Search cum Selection Committee constituted is also in violation of the UGC Regulations, 2018.'Court Cannot Be Swayed By Public Outcry': Kerala High Court Grants Pre-Arrest Bail To 3 KSRTC Employees In Assault CaseCase Title: Milan Dorich v. State of KeralaCitation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 589The Kerala High Court recently granted pre-arrest bail to the three Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) employees, who were booked in September for assaulting a man and his daughter for demanding renewal of a concession certificate for her.The video of the incident had been leaked in the media, causing a public outcry against the incident.Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas in the order observed that the courts must strictly confine to the allegations and the statements given by the witnesses and their legal implications.Detaining Authority Must Be Aware That Detenu Is Already In Custody & Must Show Compelling Reasons To Pass Preventive Detention Order: Kerala HCCase Title: Rishada Haris K.P. v. State of Kerala & Ors.Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 590The Kerala High Court recently reiterated the settled position that an order of preventive detention can be passed against a person who is already in custody, subject to the condition that the detaining authority is aware of the detenu already being in detention, and secondly, that there are compelling circumstances justifying such preventive detention.The Division Bench comprising Justice Alexander Thomas and Justice Sophy Thomas added that the detaining authority must be satisfied from the material produced before it that the detenu is likely to be released from custody in the near future whereafter, he is very likely to indulge in further prejudicial activities.Law College Elections | Returning Officer Can Only Verify Validity Of Nomination Paper, Not Competence Of A Candidate: Kerala HCCase Title: Bennat Tom V. v. Calicut University & Ors.Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 591While dealing with a case relating to 'Class Representative' elections in the Government Law College at Kozhikode, the Kerala High Court held that the power vested in a Returning Officer is limited to verifying the validity of a nomination paper, and not determining the eligibility/ competence of a candidate.In the instant case, Justice Devan Ramachandran observed that the Returning Officer had rejected Petitioner's nomination paper on the ground that if he won the elections, it would be a futile exercise since his classes were set to end soon. Turning down such an approach, the bench observed,"...what the Returning Officer has actually done is not to decide the validity of the nomination, but the eligibility of the petitioner to contest the election – which the said Authority surely obtained no competence or jurisdiction to have done."S.138 NI Act | Whether Demand Notice Issued To Correct Address Is Matter Of Evidence, Not Reason To Quash Complaint: Kerala High CourtCase Title: K.P. Ramachandran...

Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: November 14 to November 20, 2022

Athira Prasad

Tags