27 October 2026
Justice P. Gopinath of the Kerala High Court dismissed a writ petition by a serving Additional District and Sessions Judge who sought to engage a legal practitioner in the departmental inquiry against him. The Court held that Rule 15(6) of the Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1960 bars the engagement of a legal practitioner during such an enquiry, and that the officer may instead take the assistance of another judicial officer. It also held that Rule 15(3), which lets the Inquiring Authority amend, alter or modify charges, carries no stage-specific limit, so a revised memo of charges issued after witnesses were examined could not be struck down. The Court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Dinesh Chandra Pandey v. High Court of Madhya Pradesh (2010), and left the officer free to seek more time to reply and to ask that witnesses be recalled.
Rule barring a lawyer:
Rule 15(6)
Rules:
Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1960
Why it matters for exams: The ruling names the Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1960 - the disciplinary code for Kerala government servants and a standard Kerala PSC topic.
Kerala PSCUPSC
In plain words
KCS (CCA) Rules Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1960 — The rules that govern disciplinary action against Kerala government servants.
27 October 2026
A Division Bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice Basant Balaji, hearing the public interest litigation One Earth One Life v. State of Kerala, proposed a Special Task Force to examine and carry out the recommendations in earlier reports on encroachment of government land in Munnar and nearby areas of Idukki district. The task force would draw officers from the Revenue and Police departments along with the amicus curiae and advocates of the Court's choice, and would be separate from the Special Investigation Team already verifying title deeds. The Bench noted that about six reports prepared since 2003, from the then Additional Chief Secretary's report onward, had not been acted on. The State was asked to name officers who can serve on the task force exclusively for at least six months. In August 2023 the Bench had asked the District Police Chief to consider registering cases against encroachers under the Kerala Land Conservancy Act, and in February 2026 it partly relaxed its bar on issuing pattas in Idukki, allowing claims of those who occupied the land before 1 August 1971 to be processed subject to the limits in the Kerala Land Assignment Rules, 1964.
Petition:
One Earth One Life v. State of Kerala
Reports pending since:
2003
Minimum tenure sought for officers:
6 months
Why it matters for exams: The case names the Kerala Land Conservancy Act and the Kerala Land Assignment Rules, 1964 - the two instruments Kerala uses against encroachment of government land.
Kerala PSCUPSC
In plain words
Amicus curiae Friend of the court — A lawyer the court appoints to assist it rather than a party.
27 October 2026
Before Justice A. Badharudeen of the Kerala High Court, Director General of Prosecution T.A. Asaf Ali opposed Kerala Public Service Commission and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Anr., WP(Crl.) 1497/2026, in which the Commission has asked the Court to quash the Crime Branch FIR and the sanction to prosecute. The FIR invokes Section 316(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 7(c) and 13(1)(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, with the State's sanction given under Section 17A of that Act. The Commission has also asked for a declaration that it and its staff are not employed in connection with the affairs of the State, so that the State cannot sanction their prosecution. The case concerns recruitment to the post of Chief (Industry and Infrastructure Division) in the State Planning Board, notified in 2022, where an internal inquiry found that one question in 177 answer scripts and nine questions in all 228 scripts had not been evaluated. The matter is listed for final hearing on 2 November 2026.
Case:
WP(Crl.) 1497/2026
Sanction provision:
Section 17A, Prevention of Corruption Act
Answer scripts examined:
228
Why it matters for exams: Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, which requires prior approval before a police inquiry against a public servant, is a frequent Polity and law question.
Kerala PSCUPSC
In plain words
BNS Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — The penal code that replaced the Indian Penal Code.
27 October 2026
The committee headed by retired IAS officer Sudha Pillai, set up on 13 July 2026 to review the institutional, financial, governance and operational framework of the Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board, told the Kerala Legislative Assembly that it finds no case for KIIFB to continue as a body that raises funds and finances projects. Its report says KIIFB's borrowings now count against the State's borrowing space, that it borrows at a higher cost than the State and that its liabilities are in substance direct State liabilities. It recommends that the government take over KIIFB's existing debt and budget for repayment, that market borrowing by KIIFB be stopped by omitting Sections 8 and 9 and other provisions of the KIIFB (Amendment) Act, 2016, and that a performance audit by the Comptroller and Auditor General be sought under Section 14(1) of the CAG's (Duties, Powers and Conditions of Service) Act, 1971 for 2016-17 to 2025-26. The committee also flagged a plan to acquire 5,366 acres in Kannur and Palakkad for industrial infrastructure, estimated at Rs 12,727 crore, approved by the KIIFB Board in October 2018 without a detailed project report. The report was tabled in the Kerala Legislative Assembly.
Committee head:
Sudha Pillai
Land acquisition plan:
5,366 acres
Estimated cost:
Rs 12,727 crore
Why it matters for exams: KIIFB is the Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board, and the report turns on Section 14(1) of the CAG's (DPC) Act, 1971 - the provision for auditing bodies substantially financed by government.
Kerala PSCUPSCBank
In plain words
KIIFB Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board — The Kerala body created to raise money outside the budget for infrastructure projects.
CAG Comptroller and Auditor General of India — The constitutional auditor appointed under Article 148.
25 October 2026
Former Kerala Governor Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar wrote to President Droupadi Murmu on 15 October 2026 recommending the removal of Kerala Public Service Commission chairman M R Baiju and all 15 members on the ground of misbehaviour. He left office on 23 October. Under Article 317 of the Constitution, only the President can remove the chairman or a member of a State Public Service Commission, and the President may refer the case to the Supreme Court for an inquiry; if the Supreme Court recommends removal, the President is bound by it. Article 316 fixes a six-year term for a member of a State Public Service Commission. The recommendation follows an economics test the Commission held for three State Planning Board posts, in which question 9 was left unevaluated in 177 of 228 answer sheets and questions 10 to 18 in all 228 sheets.
Constitutional provision:
Article 317
Members named:
15
Answer sheets involved:
228
Why it matters for exams: Article 317 is the provision for removing a State Public Service Commission chairman or member, and Article 316 fixes the six-year term - both are standard Polity questions.
Kerala PSCUPSCSSC
In plain words
KPSC Kerala Public Service Commission — The constitutional body that recruits for Kerala government service.
23 October 2026
Justice Mohammed Nias C.P. of the Kerala High Court dismissed the State's appeal in The State of Kerala v. Sebastian @ Sabu V K (RSA 449/2026) and held that the State's lack of ownership or physical custody of wild animals does not by itself exclude its liability for the harm they cause. The Court traced the State's duty to Article 48A of the Constitution and the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, and said the duty is one of reasonable care rather than a duty to fence all forest land. The plaintiff, an agriculturist from Thariode in Wayanad, was attacked by wild elephants in 2017 and left with permanent disability. The Munsiff's Court at Kalpetta awarded ₹5,37,030 with 8 per cent interest, and the Sub Court at Sulthanbathery dismissed the State's appeal. The High Court also held that the Kerala Rules for Payment of Compensation to Victims of Attack by Wild Animals, 1980 fix only ex gratia relief and cannot cap what a civil court may award.
Case:
RSA 449/2026
Compensation decreed by trial court:
₹5,37,030
Constitutional provision:
Article 48A
Why it matters for exams: The ruling turns on Article 48A, the Directive Principle on protecting forests and wildlife, and on the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 - both recurring Polity and Environment questions.
Kerala PSCUPSC
In plain words
Article 48A Protection and improvement of environment and safeguarding of forests and wild life — A Directive Principle added by the 42nd Amendment.
25 October 2026
Hearing the suo motu proceedings in Suo Motu v. State of Kerala (WP(C) 42844/2025 and a connected case), a Division Bench of Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. of the Kerala High Court directed the State to release Rs 9,73,85,000 of pending victim compensation claims in 225 cases, preferably within five weeks. The claims had been pending before the Additional Chief Secretary, Home Department. The direction came in proceedings in which the Court is also monitoring the working of mediation centres attached to courts in the State. Victim compensation in India is paid under the Victim Compensation Scheme that every State is required to prepare, and claims are recommended by the District Legal Services Authority or the State Legal Services Authority before the funds are released by the government.
Amount ordered released:
Rs 9,73,85,000
Cases:
225
Time given:
Preferably five weeks
Why it matters for exams: The order turns on the Victim Compensation Scheme and the Legal Services Authorities that recommend claims under it - a standard law and welfare topic.
Kerala PSCUPSC
In plain words
NALSA National Legal Services Authority — The statutory body under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 that oversees legal aid in India.
28 October 2026
The Kerala State Electricity Board has sought the government's permission on the purchase of peak-hour electricity from Himachal Pradesh, which it needs before it can approach the State electricity regulatory commission, and no final decision has been taken. Himachal Pradesh has offered 846 MW to 1,280 MW at Rs 14.50 per unit, and KSEB is negotiating to bring the rate down to Rs 12.50 per unit. If no decision is taken, power restrictions would have to be imposed again from November. In September 2026, Himachal Pradesh had freed 250 MW for Kerala after discussions with Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu, with its Additional Chief Secretary R D Naseem writing to KSEB Chairman M G Rajamanickam to settle the operational details.
Power offered:
846 MW to 1,280 MW
Rate sought by Himachal Pradesh:
Rs 14.50 per unit
Rate KSEB wants:
Rs 12.50 per unit
Why it matters for exams: KSEB is the Kerala State Electricity Board, and inter-State power purchase is regulated by a State Electricity Regulatory Commission under the Electricity Act, 2003 - both standard questions.
Kerala PSCUPSC
In plain words
KSEB Kerala State Electricity Board — The State utility that generates, transmits and distributes electricity in Kerala.
Background
Thunchath Ezhuthachan Malayalam University at Tirur carries the Kerala work on the Malayalam language into teaching and technology. The University was established by the Government of Kerala on 1st November 2012, under the initial Ordinance of 2012, and was then formalised by the Thunchath Ezhuthachan Malayalam University Act 2013. It is the only university dedicated to offering education across all knowledge disciplines in Malayalam, and it offers eleven postgraduate programmes, ten doctoral programmes and a range of online short term courses, all delivered in Malayalam. Its inaugural Vice Chancellor was K. Jayakumar, a former Chief Secretary of the State. The University publishes books and journals in Malayalam and supports translation into and out of the language, works on the reading and preservation of ancient manuscripts, and runs research in language technology aimed at bringing Malayalam up to contemporary technological standards. Its chairs and centres include the Centre for Ezhuthachan Studies, the Centre for Arabi Malayalam Studies, a Heritage Museum and the Centre for Language Technology. The campus is at Vakkad, Tirur.
Campus:
Vakkad, Tirur
Postgraduate programmes:
Eleven
Doctoral programmes:
Ten
Why it matters for exams: The Thunchath Ezhuthachan Malayalam University Act, the seat at Tirur, the first Vice Chancellor and the Centre for Arabi Malayalam Studies are the durable facts behind Kerala language and culture questions.
Kerala PSCUPSC
In plain words
Arabi Malayalam — Malayalam written in the Arabic script, used among Mappila communities of Kerala.
Language technology — Computing work that lets a language be used in software and on devices.
Ordinance — A law made by the executive when the legislature is not in session, later replaced by an Act.
Background
Kerala pays victims of wild animal attacks under the Kerala Rules for Payment of Compensation to Victims of Attack by Wild Animals, 1980, read with a Government Order of 22 March 2013 that fixed the amount. In the case in which the High Court has just held the State liable despite not owning wild animals, the Forest Range Officer had paid ₹75,000 as emergency relief, which the State argued was the maximum payable under those rules. The High Court held the rules fix the amount and the procedure for ex gratia relief only and are not the sole remedy, because the right to just compensation flows from Article 21 and the common law principle of strict liability. The State's duty to protect wildlife rests on Article 48A of the Constitution and the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972.
Rules:
Kerala Rules for Payment of Compensation to Victims of Attack by Wild Animals, 1980
Emergency relief paid:
Rs 75,000
Why it matters for exams: Article 21 and the strict liability principle are the legal basis for compensation beyond the ex gratia the 1980 Kerala rules fix - a standard law question.
Kerala PSCUPSC
In plain words
Ex gratia As a favour — A payment made without admitting legal liability.
Strict liability Liability without proof of fault — A common law rule that makes a person answerable for harm without proof of negligence.
Background
The Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board raises money outside the State budget and lends it to infrastructure projects. Its power to raise market borrowings comes from Sections 8 and 9 and other provisions of the KIIFB (Amendment) Act, 2016; the committee reviewing KIIFB has recommended that those provisions be omitted so that the Board stops borrowing from the market. The committee has also recommended that the government cancel the order that routes a share of motor vehicle tax and petroleum cess revenue to KIIFB once the State takes over its debt, and that prioritised projects be completed through government departments as capital expenditure over five years from 2026-27.
Amending Act:
KIIFB (Amendment) Act, 2016
Provisions the committee wants omitted:
Sections 8 and 9
Why it matters for exams: KIIFB's borrowing power rests on the KIIFB (Amendment) Act, 2016, and motor vehicle tax and petroleum cess are its dedicated revenue streams - exam-ready facts on off-budget borrowing.
Kerala PSCUPSCBank
In plain words
Cess A tax levied for a specific purpose — Revenue from a cess is earmarked for the purpose it is collected for.