The Kerala government has once again suspended senior IAS officer N Prasanth from service, pending disciplinary proceedings initiated against him. He has already been under suspension for over one and a half years.
Grounds for Suspension
The latest action follows a preliminary assessment that the officer made a series of public statements across print, visual, electronic, and social media platforms during March and April this year. These statements reportedly covered government policies, administration, and governance. According to the order, the comments included observations on administrative processes, policy priorities, and public governance, and were widely circulated.
Violation of Conduct Rules
The government noted that, on a prima facie basis, the tenor and context of these communications appeared inconsistent with the standards of restraint, discretion, and political neutrality expected of members of the All India Services. It also stated that some communications were allegedly made without prior permission where such approval was required under service rules. The order said the cumulative effect of such statements could potentially affect public confidence in the administration and impact perceptions of neutrality and discipline. It clarified that the findings are preliminary and subject to detailed examination in formal disciplinary proceedings.
Fair Inquiry Concerns
The government further stated that continuation of the officer in service may not be conducive to a fair inquiry, citing the possibility of influencing witnesses or access to official records, and ordered that he remain under suspension. The order was issued by chief secretary A Jayathilak on Saturday. The officer will be entitled to subsistence allowance as per rules.
Comparison with Previous Suspension
Notably, the suspension order is almost identical in structure, reasoning, and grounds to the one issued earlier against B Ashok. Both cases are based on complaints from the same petitioners — Sajeev Divakaran and K O Asokan — and cite similar allegations relating to public statements on government policies and administration. The reasoning, including references to violation of conduct rules, concerns over political neutrality, and the need to ensure a fair inquiry, is largely the same in both orders.
Officer's Response
Responding to the latest development, Prasanth said: "The suspension order is stated to be based on complaints filed by two private individuals. However, any alleged violation of conduct rules is a matter to be addressed between the employer and the employee. When action is initiated based on a third-party complaint, the basic principle of natural justice requires that the person concerned be heard before such action is taken. In this case, that has not been done."
