Writ Jurisdiction – Contractual Disputes – Maintainability – Petitioner contractor sought mandamus for release of alleged unpaid amount for construction works executed under work order dated 23.12.2011 – Respondents disputed the claim and asserted full payment made via Cash Voucher and Cheque dated 04.02.2012 – No document produced by petitioner showing admitted liability – Held: Writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked for resolution of contractual disputes involving disputed questions of fact – Remedy lies in civil suit or arbitration, not under Article 226 [Paras 3–6, 10].

Contract Law – Enforcement of Contractual Obligations – Petition based on alleged non-payment under construction contract – Relationship purely contractual without any statutory flavour – Following Kerala SEB v. Kurien E. Kalathil, (2000) 6 SCC 293 – Held: Interpretation and enforcement of contractual terms not amenable to writ jurisdiction – High Court not proper forum for adjudication of money claims arising out of contract [Paras 6, 10].

Administrative Law – Public Contracts – Absence of Admitted Liability – Where amount claimed by contractor is not admitted and disputed by State authorities, no mandamus can be issued directing payment – Held: Writ court should refrain from entering disputed factual arena; such claims require evidence and trial before civil court [Paras 4–6, 10].

Writ Jurisdiction – Disputed Questions of Fact – High Court reiterated that when controversy involves factual examination such as measurement of work done, bills raised, or payments made, writ under Article 226 not maintainable – Reliance placed on Orissa Agro Industries Corpn. Ltd. v. Bharati Industries, (2005) 12 SCC 725 and Union of India v. Puna Hinda, (2021) 10 SCC 690 [Paras 7–8].

Remedy – Availability of Alternate Forum – In presence of disputed contractual claim and existence of remedy through civil suit or arbitration, High Court declined to exercise writ jurisdiction – Principle reaffirmed that extraordinary writ remedy cannot be used to enforce private rights arising from contract [Paras 9–10].

Writ petition dismissed — Court held that claim for money under a contract with State authorities cannot be adjudicated under Article 226 in absence of admitted liability — Remedy lies before competent civil forum or through arbitration — No order as to costs. [Paras 10–12].

Service Law – Compassionate Appointment – Fraud and Misrepresentation – Appointment void ab initio – Petitioner, claiming to be son of deceased employee Sumitra Devi, secured appointment on compassionate grounds – Inquiry revealed petitioner was son of Yashoda Devi, not Sumitra Devi – Legal heir and succession certificates found to be obtained by suppression of facts – Held: Fraud vitiates all solemn acts – Appointment obtained by fraud confers no right or protection under Article 311 – Writ dismissed – Impugned order dated 04.07.2025 upheld [Paras 89–97, 108–110].

Compassionate Appointment – Eligibility & Parentage – Proof of Fraudulent Representation – Petitioner’s father, while serving as Revenue Inspector, submitted false affidavit and legal heir certificate showing petitioner as son of deceased teacher Sumitra Devi – Inquiry and statements of Sumitra Devi’s daughters (Snehlata and Anita) proved petitioner is son of Yashoda Devi – Appointment based on misrepresentation held fraudulent and non est in law [Paras 24–26, 89–90].

Departmental Inquiry – Fresh Inquiry in compliance with Division Bench order dated 24.04.2025 – Petitioner repeatedly sought adjournments; did not produce evidence – Inquiry Officer’s report based on official records and witness statements upheld – Due process satisfied – No violation of natural justice [Paras 21, 23–26, 99].

Fraud – Legal Consequence – Fraud unravels everything – Concealment of material facts amounts to suppressio veri and suggestio falsi – Appointment and benefits obtained through fraud are nullities – Salary and pension benefits drawn under such appointment recoverable – No equity or constitutional protection available [Paras 55–57, 95–97, 108–110].

Interim Orders – No Enduring Right – Interim reliefs merge in final adjudication and confer no substantive rights – Petitioner’s reliance on interim orders untenable once disciplinary order attained finality [Paras 91–94].

Succession/Legal Heir Certificates – Fraudulent Procurement – Competent authority not bound to honour certificates obtained by concealment or false information – Fraudulent certificates can be ignored without formal cancellation – Fraud renders them void ab initio [Paras 76–80].

Article 311 – Scope of Protection – Protection under Article 311 available only to validly appointed employees – Appointment obtained by fraud or forged documents is void ab initio; cancellation thereof does not amount to punitive dismissal – No disciplinary inquiry required where appointment itself is illegal [Paras 102–103].

Equitable Relief – Denied to Fraudulent Litigant – Writ jurisdiction is discretionary – A petitioner approaching court with unclean hands forfeits equitable relief – Fraudulent conduct disentitles writ remedy [Paras 81–83].

Decision: Writ petition dismissed – Order dated 04.07.2025 declaring petitioner’s appointment void ab initio affirmed – Court holds petitioner guilty of fraud and suppression of material facts – No relief granted – Directions for recovery of benefits implied [Paras 109–110].

Criminal Law – Quashing of Proceedings – Allegation of Sexual Harassment by Child Welfare Committee Chairman – Lack of Sexual Intent – Petitioner, a statutory authority under Child Welfare Committee, was alleged to have made sexually coloured remarks during counselling of two minor girls – Statements attributed to the petitioner included reference to the girls’ relationships and questioning their attire – Held: Alleged words, though intemperate and inappropriate in tone, do not amount to sexually coloured remarks or indicate sexual intent – Interaction occurred in official capacity and in the presence of another counsellor – Prosecution under Section 354A(1)(iv) IPC and Sections 11/12 of POCSO Act unsustainable [Paras 6-10]

POCSO Act – Section 11 r/w Section 12 – Requirement of Sexual Intent – To attract offence of sexual harassment under POCSO, act must involve sexual intent – Mere inappropriate or offensive language, without such intent, held insufficient – Petitioner’s conduct, viewed in totality, lacked sexual intent and did not amount to harassment under the Act [Paras 8-10]

Abuse of Process – Frivolous Prosecution – Section 482 CrPC – Petitioner alleged that complaint was motivated by enmity after he reported sexual exploitation of minor girls by their lovers – Court accepted that prosecution appeared retaliatory and not based on genuine grievance – Criminal proceedings quashed to prevent abuse of judicial process [Paras 5, 10]

Decision: Criminal Miscellaneous Case Nos. 2457/2022 and 2464/2022 allowed – Proceedings in SC Nos. 466/2021 and 467/2021 on the files of Additional Sessions Court-I, Thalassery quashed

Banking Law – Pledge of Gold Ornaments – Right of Redemption – Petitioner availed gold loan repayable by 12.01.2025 – Bank conducted auction on 17.01.2025 without observing 30-day post-maturity redemption period stipulated in contract – Held: Premature auction violated Section 176 of Contract Act and terms of pledge – Petitioner’s offer to pay dues two days prior to auction showed intent to redeem [Paras 6–9]

Fair Procedure – Auction Transparency – Principles of Natural Justice – Auction process lacked transparency – No reserve price disclosed – No opportunity given to Petitioner to participate – Bank refused post-auction disclosure of bidder details – Court found process vitiated by opacity and procedural unfairness – Auction set aside [Paras 10–11]

Lien and Appropriation – Adjustment of Surplus Proceeds – Bank adjusted surplus auction proceeds from gold loan against Petitioner’s unrelated housing loan dues – Held: Where sale itself is vitiated, consequential appropriation is invalid – Adjustment set aside – Bank may recover dues via separate proceedings in accordance with law [Paras 12]

Public Law Duty of Banks – Writ Jurisdiction – Despite private contractual origin, Bank actions held amenable to writ jurisdiction due to statutory flavour and fiduciary character – Writ maintainable to ensure compliance with fair process and banking norms [Para 13]

Decision:

Writ Petition partly allowed –

(a) Auction dated 17.01.2025 quashed

(b) If jewellery remains in specie, to be returned upon payment of lawful dues

(c) If jewellery sold, Bank to refund higher of ₹1,45,000 or market value as of auction date with 6% interest p.a. from 17.01.2025

(d) All appropriation of proceeds toward other liabilities (including housing loan) reversed – Bank may pursue such recovery separately as per law [Paras 14]

Section 84 of the A.P. Endowments Act - Religious and Charitable Trusts – Unauthorized Occupation – Tenants Treated as Encroachers – Endowments Tribunal’s Eviction Order Partly Upheld – Appellants were in occupation of shop premises forming part of trust property endowed under registered Will of 1958 – Trustees had granted lease but no formal lease deed existed – Tribunal found the appellants to be encroachers under Section 83 of the A.P. Endowments Act and directed eviction and payment of damages – Appellate Court found that original trustees had already transferred rights to another religious institution via registered settlement deed – All legal challenges to that transfer (including writ petitions and earlier CMAs) had been withdrawn – Held: Appellants’ lessor had given up any claim over property, and appellants could no longer assert tenancy rights – However, in view of long possession, nature of business, and payment of rents, damages awarded by Tribunal were set aside – Eviction upheld with two-month grace period to vacate [Paras 1–6]

Trust Law – Transfer of Trust Property – Validity of Settlement Deed – Effect of Withdrawal of Legal Proceedings – Settlement deed in favour of Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Temple, Mangalagiri was challenged in O.S. No.144/2010 and W.P. No.31056/2010 – Both proceedings withdrawn – Held: Withdrawal of legal challenge affirmed the validity of the settlement deed – Appellants claiming under erstwhile trustees cannot sustain possession once the transfer stood undisputed [Paras 5–6]

Land Law – Possession Without Title – Unauthorized Occupation After Lessor’s Rights Extinguished – Relief of Damages Denied on Equitable Grounds – Though possession was unauthorized, Court exercised discretion in equity – Found appellants to be small shopkeepers earning livelihood – While eviction confirmed, direction to pay damages of ₹1,000 to ₹2,000 per month as ordered by Tribunal was set aside [Paras 5–6]

Decision: Appeal partly allowed – Tribunal’s order directing eviction confirmed – Direction to pay damages set aside – Appellants to vacate within two months – No order as to costs.

Mining Law – Vehicle Seizure – Authorized Officer – Seizure upheld – Petitioner challenged seizure of Tata Signa Hyva truck on the ground that it was illegally seized by the Tahasildar – Held: Though the raid was supervised by the Tahasildar, the seizure was carried out by a Sub-Inspector of Police, a competent authority under Rule 51(1)(ii) of the OMMC Rules – Thus, seizure cannot be invalidated on ground of lack of authority [Paras 6-7] –

Due Process – Failure to Initiate Proceedings – Petitioner’s vehicle detained for nearly five months without FIR, penalty notice, or confiscation proceeding – Held: Authorities failed to initiate proceedings under MMDR Act or Rule 51 of the OMMC Rules – Continued detention of vehicle without adjudicative process violates Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution [Paras 8-10, 15] –

Seized Vehicles – Judicial Approach – Court followed settled law that seized vehicles should not be indefinitely detained – Referenced Sunderbhai Ambala Desai v. State of Gujarat and Bishwajit Dey v. State of Assam – Held: Prolonged custody causes deterioration and defeats owner’s right to livelihood – Detention must be justified by ongoing proceedings or evidence needs [Paras 11-13] –

Conditional Release – Directions Issued – Truck ordered to be released to petitioner on conditions including production of documents, submission of photographs, and furnishing of security bond of ₹2,00,000 – Authorities directed to complete penalty or confiscation proceedings within 8 weeks – Court held that indeterminate delay violates rule of law and deprives petitioner of legal remedy [Paras 16-18] –

Decision: Writ Petition allowed – Seized vehicle to be released forthwith on compliance with conditions – State directed to initiate and conclude appropriate proceedings without delay.

Criminal Law – Gang Rape – Acquittal – Appellants convicted for gang rape and murder of a college student who was set ablaze – Medical evidence confirmed genital injuries but no proof that intercourse was against her will or without consent – Dying declaration did not mention rape – Held: Prosecution failed to prove charge of gang rape beyond reasonable doubt – Conviction under Sections 376(d), 376(2)(m), 376(2)(n) IPC set aside [Paras 40–42, 44].

Criminal Law – Murder – Circumstantial Evidence – Deceased found with 96% burns – Accused seen at the crime scene and gave false explanation about presence – Motorcycle parked at rear of house, burn injuries on accused unexplained – Dying declaration recorded by Tehsildar confirmed victim was set on fire by accused – Held: Chain of circumstantial evidence complete – Conviction under Section 302 IPC affirmed [Paras 26–39, 44].

Criminal Procedure – Dying Declaration – Validity Without Doctor’s Certificate – Victim’s dying declaration recorded in question-answer form by Tehsildar without formal certification of fitness by doctor – Held: Dying declaration voluntary, consistent, and reliable – Doctor present and no signs of tutoring – Medical certification not mandatory if fit mental state established otherwise – Conviction can be based solely on such declaration [Paras 30–35].

Criminal Law – House Trespass with Intent to Commit Murder – Offence under Section 449/34 IPC upheld – Accused entered house knowing victim was alone and committed heinous offence – Presence and conduct of accused proved criminal intent [Paras 26–27, 43].

Indian Evidence Act – Section 106 – Adverse Inference – Appellants failed to explain their presence at the scene or injuries found on them – Held: Adverse inference justified under Section 106 – Strengthens prosecution case [Para 36–38].

Sentencing – Recalibration Post Acquittal on Rape Charge – Trial Court sentenced under 376(d)/34 IPC treating it as graver offence, omitting separate sentence for murder – On acquittal under rape charge, High Court imposes life imprisonment under Section 302 IPC separately along with ₹5,000 fine and six months RI in default – Set-off granted for period already undergone [Paras 44–45].

Decision: Appeal partly allowed – Conviction and sentence under Sections 376(d), 376(2)(m), 376(2)(n) IPC set aside – Conviction under Sections 302 IPC and 449/34 IPC upheld – Fresh sentence under Section 302 IPC imposed – Judgment forwarded to jail and trial court for compliance [Para 45].

Civil Procedure – Preliminary Decree – Order XII Rule 6 – Judgment on Admission – Trial Court passed a preliminary decree for partition of moveable assets based on admissions made in the written statement – Appellants contended that the deceased had already distributed moveable assets by designating nominees and joint account holders – Held: Designation of nominees does not override the rights of legal heirs under succession law – Admissions in the pleadings clearly established that no testamentary disposition was made regarding moveable assets – No error found in Trial Court’s reliance on such admissions to grant a 1/4th share each to the four children of the deceased [Paras 27–30].

Partition Suit – Stay of Proceedings – Section 10 CPC – Applicability – Appellants sought stay of partition proceedings citing pendency of related probate cases and an earlier civil suit concerning the same properties – Held: Section 10 CPC applies only where the previously instituted suit is of a civil nature involving the same matter in issue – Probate proceedings are distinct in scope and do not adjudicate on title or ownership – Therefore, Section 10 not attracted to bar continuation of partition suit [Paras 31–35].

Inherent Powers – Section 151 CPC – Judicial Discretion to Stay Proceedings – Even if Section 10 CPC is inapplicable, the Court may exercise inherent powers under Section 151 CPC to stay proceedings in the interest of justice – Held: Since the outcome of pending probate proceedings and related litigation will directly impact the rights of parties in the partition suit, it would be appropriate to stay further proceedings – Trial Court erred in refusing to exercise this discretion [Paras 36–43].

Succession Law – Legal Effect of Nomination – Nominee Not Equivalent to Heir – Appellants’ claim that moveable assets were already distributed through nominations and joint holdings rejected – Held: Nominee holds property in trust for the benefit of legal heirs and does not acquire beneficial ownership – Nomination does not override succession rights – Legal heirs remain entitled unless excluded by a valid will – Supported by settled law including Sarbati Devi, Shakti Yezdani and other authorities [Paras 28–29].

Decision: RFA(OS) 43/2024 dismissed – Preliminary decree for partition of moveable assets upheld – FAO(OS) 89/2023 allowed – Proceedings in CS(OS) 3262/2012 stayed until final adjudication of Probate Case Nos. 5969/2016 and 5921/2016.

Banking Law – One Time Settlement (OTS) – Judicial Review under Article 226 – Commercial Discretion of Bank – Petitioner, guarantor of defaulting borrower, challenged rejection of OTS proposal and sought mandamus to direct the bank to disclose benchmarks and accept settlement—Held: No borrower or guarantor can claim OTS as a matter of right—OTS being a policy-based concession, its application depends on the bank’s commercial wisdom—Courts cannot compel banks to accept OTS or rewrite contract terms [Paras 9–11, 18–19, 27–29].

SARFAESI and IBC Proceedings – Parallel Remedies – Since bank had already invoked SARFAESI Act and initiated proceedings under Section 7 of IBC, interference under Article 226 would defeat the special mechanisms provided for recovery and insolvency resolution—Judicial review cannot be used to obstruct statutory recovery process [Paras 17–18].

Legitimate Expectation – Doctrine Inapplicable – Absence of Policy or Assured Practice – Doctrine of legitimate expectation cannot apply where no specific OTS scheme or RBI-mandated guideline was shown—Mere hope of settlement does not create enforceable right—Distinguished Mohanlal Patidar v. Bank of Maharashtra, 2022 (2) MPLJ 276 [Paras 25–26].

OTS Policy – Disclosure of Benchmark – Not Mandatory – Bank’s non-disclosure of benchmark for OTS rejection does not amount to arbitrariness—No statutory provision mandates such disclosure—Discretion lies with financial institution to determine eligibility [Paras 18–19].

Public Money – Contractual Obligation – Judicial Restraint – Bank deals with public funds; compelling acceptance of reduced payment under OTS contrary to public interest—Courts cannot interfere with loan contracts or alter repayment terms under writ jurisdiction—Followed Bijnor Urban Cooperative Bank Ltd. v. Meenal Agrawal, (2023) 2 SCC 805 and SBI v. Arvind Electronics Pvt. Ltd., (2023) 1 SCC 540 [Paras 27–28].

Decision – Writ petition dismissed – No mandamus can issue compelling bank to accept or disclose OTS benchmark – Interim stay on recovery to continue for six weeks and thereafter to stand vacated automatically [Paras 29–30, Final Order].