IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST FEBRUARY 2007 / 2ND PHALGUNA 1928 WP(C).No. 19747 of 2004(A) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------------- K.M.BALAN, S/O.MILAN, AGED 59 YEARS, DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER (RETD.), KUZHIKKATTUTHARAYIL P.O., NARAKKAL, ERNAKULAM - 682 505. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.K.E.HAMZA RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, JAGATHY, TRIVANDRUM-14. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, ERNAKULAM. 4. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL ( A & E) KERALA, TRIVANDRUM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/02/2007,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO: 19747/2004 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OP NO. 17344/2001 DT. 26/3/2002. EXT.P2. COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE R1 DT. 20/5/2002. EXT.P3. COPY OF THE LIABILITY CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE R1 DT. 09/07/2002. EXT.P4. COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BEFORE THE R1 DT. 15/11/2002. EXT.P5. COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE R1 DT. 7/11/2002. True copy tga KURIAN JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.19747 of 2004 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 21st February, 2007. J U D G M E N T Petitioner is aggrieved by the fixation of liability as per Ext.P3. It is submitted that the fixation was made without following the procedure required for such fixation. In the counter affidavit at paragraph 6 it is stated as follows :- “While finalising the liability to the petitioner, he was present in the office of 3rd respondent. Final Liability Certificate of Rs.49,260/- was issued by the 3rd respondent as per letter No.D1-13068/2000 dated 3.5.2002. The 2nd respondent had issued a notice to the petitioner for submitting his objection on the liability certificate. But the petitioner did not respond to the notice issued by the 2nd respondent.” There is no reply. In the above circumstances, the writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the liberty to the petitioner to pursue the matter regarding liability before the first respondent, in which event, the same will be duly considered by the first respondent and appropriate action in accordance with law will be taken, within another three months. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. tgs KURIAN JOSEPH, J ---------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No. of 2002 ---------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T Dated 21st February, 2007.