Home INDIAN NEWS Kerala Korner Supreme Court Closes Senkumar Chapter

Supreme Court Closes Senkumar Chapter

39
0
SHARE
The Supreme Court of India. (File Photo: IANS)
The Supreme Court of India (File Photo: IANS)

The Supreme Court disposed of the contempt plea against Kerala Chief Secretary Nalini Netto after it was informed that its order directing the reinstatement of IPS officer T.P. Senkumar as Director General of State police has been complied with….reports Asian Lite News

The Supreme Court of India. (File Photo: IANS)
The Supreme Court of India (File Photo: IANS)

The bench of Justice Madan B. Lokur and Justice Deepak Gupta closed the contempt plea as the court was told that the Chief Secretary has already tendered an unconditional apology for delay in reinstating Senkumar as Kerala police chief.

Senkumar was reinstated as state police chief on May 6. He is set to retire on June 30. The top court by its April 24 order had directed restoration of Senkumar as police head.

Senkumar was removed as police chief when Pinarayi Vijayan took over as Chief Minister on May 25, 2016.

The top court had imposed a fine of Rs. 25,000 on Kerala government on May 5 as it dismissed the State plea for a clarification on its April 24 order directing the reinstatement of IPS T.P. Senkumar as the Director General of State Police.

Senkumar had moved the top court challenging his removal as State police Chief and his transfer. Senkumar had moved the top court after his plea against his transfer was turned down by the Kerala High court.

Reinstating Senkumar as DGP, the top court in its April 24 judgment had said that he was dealt with “unfairly and arbitrarily” and it was post the Puttingal Temple tragedy and the Jisha murder and not the two tragedies themselves that led to it.

The top court had brushed aside the state government’s submission that its subjective satisfaction in removing Senkumar could not be gone into.

The court had said, “The subjective satisfaction of the State Government must be based on some credible material, which this court might not analyze but which can certainly be looked into.”