KOCHI: Giving a respite to Oommen Chandy, the Kerala High court on Friday set aside the findings and observation of the Vigilance Court in the Palmolein Case and asked the Vigilance department to complete the re-investigation and file the report in six weeks.Justice K T Shankaran passed the order while considering a petition filed by IAS officer Jiji Thomson, the fifth accused in the case, challenging the Vigilance Special Court order directing to probe Oommen Chandy’s involvement in the palmolein deal. The court dismissed the impleading petitions of Opposition leader V S Achuthanandan, BJP National Executive Member Alphons Kannanthanam and the All India Lawyers Union.The court further stated that the crime was registered on March 21,1997 and the final report was filed in March 2001. Even now, the final report of the further investigation has not been filed. The reasons for the same are verified. It is not necessary to make any observation about the reasons for the delay.The first accused passed away on December 23, 2010. Many of the other accused are IAS officers. Their grievance is that the pendency of the case would affect their promotion prospects and career.In the interests of the general public also it is necessary to dispose of the case at the earliest. The court held that after the investigation report is filed, the special judge shall expedite the proceedings. However, the judge shall dispose of the discharge petition filed by Jiji, in accordance with the law.The findings contained in paragraphs 19, 20 and 21 of the Vigilance Court order was set aside by the High Court on Friday. In his order on August 8, Special Court Judge P K Haneefa had observed that Oommen Chandy was aware of the decision taken to import Palmolien through Power and Energy Company paying 15 per cent service charge. The cabinet decided to import palmolien without inviting tenders. The other observation is that the statement of the Chief Minister recorded by the investigating officer manifestly and visibly shows that the decision was taken in the cabinet. The court had also observed that Chandy was aware that the service fee was not negotiated. All these remarks by the Vigilance Court were set aside by the HC. Another shot in the arm for Chandy came when the court did not allow Leader of Opposition V S Achuthanandan and former MLA Alphons Kannanthanam to implead in the case. The court said there was no reason for them to implead. In September, when the case came up first, Advocate General K P Dandapani had informed the High Court that they had no problems if the Palmolien Case was re-investigated.
Comments
0 comment