The controversial Kerala State Cashew Development Corporation (KSCDC) scam case witnessed a major development after two former officials accused of corruption and causing losses of crores of rupees to the Corporation filed appeals before the Kerala High Court citing judicial overreach.

Former Managing Director K A Ratheesh and former KSCDC Chairman R Chandrasekhar moved the appeals after sanction to prosecute them was recently granted, challenging various interim orders passed by the Single Bench. The orders were issued while the court was considering a contempt petition initiated after the State repeatedly refused to grant sanction.

The appeals allege judicial overreach by the Single Bench, which refused to accept the State's decision not to grant sanction and proceeded to examine its correctness.

The appellants further contended that the Single Bench compelled the sanctioning authority to grant permission to prosecute them, thereby curtailing their right to challenge the order.

One of the orders under challenge was passed on July 17, when the Single Bench recorded its satisfaction with the State's order granting sanction to proceed against the two and directed the CBI to file a final report in the case within two weeks.

The Single Bench has currently reserved its verdict in the contempt petition concerning the action to be taken against Industries Secretary Mohammed Hanish and K Biju IAS, Secretary of the Forest and Cashew Department. Both officials had tendered unconditional apologies before the court on different occasions.

Hanish was criticised by the court for refusing to grant sanction despite repeated directions. Biju, who subsequently passed the order granting sanction, also faced the court's criticism for allegedly making contemptuous remarks in a government order that was later cancelled.

In the cancelled order, Biju had stated that the sanction was “forced” because of the Single Bench's orders and that there had been no application of mind by the government. A copy of the cancelled order was also given to one of the accused, who held a press conference and read out the remarks. The order was subsequently cancelled on the advice of the Advocate General.

While the contempt petition remains reserved for orders, the appellants have moved the appeals alleging that, except for the decision on the punishment to be imposed on Hanish and Biju, all other issues have already been decided by the Single Bench.

The Registry had pointed out several defects in the appeals, noting that Ratheesh and Chandrasekhar were not parties to the contempt proceedings and that they had challenged multiple interim orders of the Single Bench through two separate appeals.

When the matter came up on Monday, the Division Bench comprising Justice K Natarajan and Justice P Krishna Kumar asked the appellants to cure the defects pointed out by the Registry.

The Bench also questioned the maintainability of the appeals and asked the appellants either to challenge the sanction order or implead themselves in the proceedings before the Single Bench.

However, Senior Advocate S Sreekumar, appearing for the appellants, contended that the proceedings before the Single Bench had already concluded and that the sanction order had been passed pursuant to the Single Bench's direction.

After hearing the parties for some time, the court directed the appellants to first cure the defects in the appeals. It also observed that separate interim orders cannot be challenged through a single appeal.

“There are different different orders, different different cause of action... Overall issue may be one,” the court orally observed.
The case is posted for Friday.
(With LiveLaw inputs)