The Crime Branch (CB) has counselled an anti-corruption court here to drop criminal charges against seven former officials of the Kerala University (KU) accused of conspiracy, corruption and nepotism in appointment to the post of university assistants (UA) Grade-II in 2005.
The court filing in late August appeared on the public domain only on Saturday. The recommendation was potentially controversial given that several of the main accused in the case are office-bearers of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) [CPI(M)].
As many as 45,538 university graduates had taken the examination for 350 odd vacancies. Around 175 of them got appointed. Hundreds of candidates later moved the court, questioning the fairness of the selection process. The examination soon became a symbol of political patronage, corruption and preferential employment.
The candidates alleged that the officials had leaked question paper in the Optical Mark Recognition (OMR) format. They doubted the valuation and interview process. The case meandered through various courts since 2006.
Finally, in 2014 and under the United Democratic Front (UDF) government, the CB named former Vice Chancellor M.K. Ramachandran Nair; Pro Vice Chancellor V. Jayaprakash; Syndicate members B.S. Rajeev (late), A.A. Rasheed, K.A. Andrews and N.V. Russel; and registrar K.A. Hashim as the main accused in the “examination fraud”.
The agency indicted them for conspiracy, cheating, corruption, nepotism, falsification of records, criminal breach of trust by a public servant, forgery and destruction of evidence.
In 2016, the High Court quashed the chargesheet. It said the CB should bring the beneficiaries of the racket under the ambit of its probe and seize the “doctored” answer sheets and other material. The KU had spent ₹43 lakh on the examination process. The High Court ordered a further inquiry.
In May 2020, under the Left Democratic Front (LDF) government, the CB reversed its earlier position that it had evidence to prosecute the accused. Then CB Director Tomin Thachankery told the court that the material collected by the Crime Branch was not sufficing to indict the accused. He found no point in continuing the investigation.