Thiruvananthapuram: The Kerala government on Tuesday, October 27 told the Kerala High Court that the Kerala Public Service Commission's plea to quash the Crime Branch FIR over alleged irregularities in a State Planning Board recruitment examination is not maintainable, and that the investigation is progressing vigorously, Live Law reported.
Source: Live Law
Director General of Prosecution T. A. Asaf Ali, appearing for the State before Justice A. Badharudeen, submitted that the investigation is progressing well and that the Commission has now started acting — it has suspended two persons. According to the reports, Additional Secretary (Examination wing) R. Hari, who has been named as an accused, has been suspended, and action has also been taken against former Deputy Secretary P. Satheesh, who is also named as an accused.
Separately, the Special Investigation Team has recorded the statements of two PSC members and summoned Chairman M. R. Baiju for questioning, The Indian Messenger reported on October 27. The government has also initiated proceedings against the retired Satheesh to withhold his pensionary benefits, the report said. Hari was in charge of the evaluation division, while Satheesh headed the on-screen digital marking system.
The case goes back to the Commission's examination for the post of Chief (Industry and Infrastructure Division) in the Kerala State Planning Board, notified in 2022. A shortlist of ten candidates was published in February 2025, and one candidate, Jayalal V. S., approached the Kerala Administrative Tribunal pointing out that ten questions in the examination had not been evaluated.
A preliminary inquiry ordered by the Commission in June 2026 found an evaluation error: one question in 177 answer scripts and nine questions in all 228 answer scripts had not been evaluated — ten questions carrying 58 marks in all, according to the case record. The Commission says it took corrective measures with the Tribunal's permission.
On the State's prosecution sanction under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, the Crime Branch registered an FIR alleging offences under Section 316(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (criminal breach of trust) and Sections 7(c) and 13(1)(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Commission's plea seeks to quash both the sanction and the FIR — all of these remain allegations at this stage, and no finding on the merits has been recorded.
The hearing itself has already produced sharp exchanges: at an earlier posting the Court criticised the pace of the probe, asking why the prime accused had not been questioned and why documents had not been seized, and orally remarked that if an accused in a murder FIR does not cooperate, investigators' hands are not chained. The complainant Jayalal V. S. has been impleaded in the High Court proceedings so his grievance is heard directly.