The Supreme Court will hear a Special Leave Petition filed by whistleblower Manimekhala, challenging the appointment of Anila Varghese, wife of former Kerala Minister Anoop Jacob, to the Kerala Bhasha Institute. The plea, citing constitutional violations and procedural irregularities, seeks to overturn the Kerala High Court’s dismissal of the case. The hearing is scheduled for after the Supreme Court’s summer recess, beginning July 7.
NEW DELHI: A Special Leave Petition (SLP) has been filed before the Supreme Court by whistleblower Manimekhala, seeking the rejection of the alleged unlawful appointment of Anila Varghese, wife of former Kerala Minister of Food and Civil Supplies Anoop Jacob, to the Kerala Bhasha Institute.
READ ALSO: Has Media Failed Democracy? Insights from Former Supreme Court Justice Kurian Joseph
The plea, presented by advocate Tarini K Nayak and filed through Advocate-on-Records (AORs) Renjith Marar and Lakshmi Kaimal, has brought significant attention to the matter.
Manimekhala’s petition categorically labels the appointment of Anila Varghese as “illegal and unconstitutional,” highlighting that it violates Articles 14, 15, and 16 of the Constitution of India, alongside other relevant service rules and employment laws.
Initially, her plea was dismissed by the Kerala High Court at Ernakulam, which found no substantive evidence to support her claims. This rejection has prompted Manimekhala to approach the Supreme Court for relief.
The controversy centers around the High Court’s dismissal order, which has sparked debates over alleged procedural illegalities and violations of constitutional provisions.
The petition emphasized that the High Court failed to thoroughly consider the evidence presented by Manimekhala, which allegedly demonstrated Varghese’s lack of requisite educational qualifications and age eligibility for the position of Assistant Director at the Kerala Bhasha Institute.
Advocate Nayak, representing the whistleblower, argued that the appointment process violated statutory requirements, including the mandatory notification of vacancies to employment exchanges as per the Employment Exchanges (Compulsory Notification of Vacancies) Act, 1959. This omission allegedly undermined fair competition for the position.
Nayak further claimed that the documents submitted by Varghese were inauthentic, forged, and fabricated, suggesting collusion among the parties involved to secure the position for an ineligible candidate, thereby defrauding the state exchequer.
The petition calls for setting aside the High Court’s dismissal order and demands a comprehensive reevaluation of the entire appointment process. It emphasizes the necessity for transparency, strict adherence to legal norms, and accountability for all parties involved in the alleged appointment scam.
The Supreme Court sources and the registry have indicated that the matter will be heard immediately after the summer vacations, post-July 7.
FOLLOW FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
