Santhosh Karunakaran vs. Ombudsman cum Ethics Officer, Kerala Cricket Association

Before the Supreme Court, Karunakaran contended that the proceedings before the Ombudsman were non-transparent and that he was never informed about the orders directing impleadment of DCAs. He relied on emails addressed to the Ombudsman, requesting copies of records in the original proceedings.

The bench noted that the Ombudsman rejected this request through an email on the ground that Ombudsman is a persona designata and not a court of record.

The Supreme Court thus found merit in Karunakaran’s grievance regarding non-transparency.

“The appellant had made out a plausible case to suggest that the proceedings before the Ombudsman were non-transparent and that the copies of the relevant records/orders were not provided to the appellant,” the bench said.

Click here to read article