IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 2ND SEPTEMBER 2010 / 11TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 4425 of 2005(B) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- G.SREENIVASAN POTTI, S/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN POTTI, AGED 57, RESIDING AT KRISHNA BHAVAN, NADUVILAKKARA, THEVALAKKARA P.O., KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, REP. BY SECRETARY, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD OFFICE, NANDANCODE. TRIVANDRUM. ADV. SRI.P.G.PARAMESWARA PANICKER,SC, TDB SRI.K.N.VENUGOPALA PANICKER, SC, TDB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 2.9.10, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No. 4425/2005. APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS P1. COPY OF THE NLC DTD.27.5.04. P2. COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.16.6.04. P3. COPY OF THE PETITION DTD.5.7.04. P4. COPY OF THE OBJECTION DTD.5.7.2004. sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 4425 of 2005 ================== Dated this the 2nd day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner retired from the service of the Travancore Devaswom Board on 31.5.2003. The petitioner is now aggrieved by Ext.P1 liability certificate issued to the petitioner, whereby an amount of Rs.21,316.79 has been proposed to be recovered from the petitioner from his retirement benefits. The petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed a detailed explanation, Ext.P4, explaining why the liability cannot be fixed on the petitioner as stated in Ext.P1. The petitioner submits that without considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner, the petitioner cannot be saddled with the said liability. 2. I have heard the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Travancore Devaswom Board also. 3. It is settled law that liability can be fixed only after affording an opportunity of being beard to a retired employee. From Ext.P1 I find that before fixing the liability, the petitioner has not been given an opportunity of being heard. That being so, it is only appropriate that the respondent considers Ext.P4 explanation submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon expeditiously. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a w.p.c.4425/05 2 direction to the respondent to pass orders regarding the liability of the petitioner after considering Ext.P4 explanation filed by the petitioner to Ext.P1 liability certificate and after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge