High Court of KeralaWP(C)/28955/2012disposed of

T.K George v. State Of Kerala

2015-07-22Honourable Dr. Justice A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JULY 2015/31ST ASHADHA, 1937 WP(C).No. 28955 of 2012 (T) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S):

-------------------------- T.K GEORGE AGED 56 YEARS RTD HEAD MASTER PERPETUAL SUCCOUR HIGH SCHOOL KORATTY EAST P.O ,RESIDING ATY THELLEKATTU HOUSE KADUKUTTY 680309 THRISSUR DISTRICT BY ADVS.SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER SRI.FIROZ K.ROBIN RESPONDENT(S):

----------------------------

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION THRISSUR

3. DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER IRINJALAKUDA

4. THE HEAD MASTER PERPECTUAL SUCCOUR HIGH SCHOOL THIRUMUDIKUNNU KORATTY EAST P.O PIN 680308 ADDL.R5 THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS OFFICE OF THE DPI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001 ADDL.R5 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 22.07.2015 IN IA No.13916/2015.

R4 BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KURIAN R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.T.R. RAJESH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 28955 of 2012 (T) ------------------------------------------ APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

----------------------------------- EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 11.07.2012 EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 11.07.2012 EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE GO(P) No.615/(138)/97/FIN. DATED 28.06.1997. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 21.1.2012 AGAINST THE OBJECTION OF AUDIT ENQUIRY UNDER THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 01.06.2012 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 07.08.2012 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 06.09.2012 FILED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 07.09.2012 EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 25.09.2012 EXT.P10 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 26.09.2012.

EXT.P11 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 09.01.2013.

EXT.P12 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF AUDIT OBJECTION DATED 24.12.2012 COMMUNICATED TO THE PETITIONER.

EXT.P13 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03.09.2013 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXT.P13(a) TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P13 EXT.P14 TRUE COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL EXPLANATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 27.03.2014, WITHOUT EXHIBITS. EXT.P14(a) TRUE COPY OF THE AD CARD SIGNED BY THE DPI.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL // True copy // PA to Judge das

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

=========================================== ===================================================== Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2015

JUDGMENT

The petitioner entered service as HSA (Physical Science) on 05.07.1982. He was promoted as Head Master in PSHS Thirumudikkunnu with effect from 01.04.2001 and he retired on superannuation with effect from 18.07.2012. When his pension papers were forwarded to the 3rd respondent, the 3rd respondent raised an objection with regard to the re-option exercised by the petitioner pursuant to the 1992 pay revision order. The petitioner had effected a re-option on 06.09.1997, pursuant to the higher grade option modification order dated 28.06.1997. The objection raised by the 3rd respondent was with regard to the option exercised for the period 01.07.1993 to 05.09.1997. By Ext.P4 explanation dated 21.01.

2012, the petitioner submitted a detailed explanation to the objections raised by the 3rd respondent, and also refunded the excess pay/allowances that were drawn during the period from 01.03.1992 to 30.06.1993. The 2nd and 3rd respondents, however, continued to maintain their stand that excess amounts had been drawn by the petitioner during the period in question. When repeated representations by the petitioner did not yield any positive results, the petitioner through Exts.

-2objection to them deducting the alleged excess amount from the gratuity amounts that were payable to him, so long as he received the balance amounts that were due to him by way of pensionary benefits.

During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner has filed several interlocutory applications producing various documents. A perusal of the said documents, in particular Ext.P13, produced along with IA No.13916 of 2014, indicates that the respondents were taking a stand that the liability due from the petitioner was in an amount of Rs.2,60677/-. Through another IA, namely IA No.9450 of 2015, the petitioner has produced two non liability certificates dated 04.05.2015 issued by the 2nd and 4th respondents and it is the case of the petitioner that, in the light of the said non liability certificates, there was no justification in the respondents withholding any amount from the pensionary benefits that were due and payable to the petitioner.

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.

-3On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the bar, I find that against Ext.P13 communication produced along with IA No.13916 of 2014, the petitioner has preferred an appeal together with a detailed explanation (Ext.P14) before the additional 5th respondent, the Director of Public Instructions. Under the circumstances, I am of the view that the writ petition can be disposed with a direction to the additional 5th respondent to consider the appeal and the explanation preferred by the petitioner before him, in the light of the non liability certificates dated 04.05.2015 issued to the petitioner by the 2nd and 4th respondents, and disburse the amounts due to the petitioner by way of DCRG and other pensionary benefits after withholding any amount, if found due from the petitioner.

Accordingly, I dispose the writ petition, with a direction to the additional 5th respondent to consider and pass orders on the appeal and the explanations preferred by the petitioner before him against Ext.P13 communication produced along with IA No.13916 of 2014, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner.

-4non-liability certificates dated 04.05.2015, issued to the petitioner by the 2nd and 4th respondents. To enable the additional 5th respondent to do this, the petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition, together with all the interlocutory applications, along with a copy of this judgment before the additional 5th respondent, for further action.

Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE das