IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 25TH AUGUST 2008 / 3RD BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 13741 of 2008(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER: PETITIONER ---------------------- S.VENUGOPALA DAS, S/O.C.SANKARAN. AGED 61 YEARS, RETIRED ASSISTANT SECRETARY COMMISSIONERATE OF CIVIL SUPPLIES RESIDING AT T.C. 18/1809 (I) "SARAS" PLAVILA, THIRUMALA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY ADV. SRI.C.K.PAVITHRAN SRI.M.X.XAVIER SRI.K.BAIJU RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. DIRECTOR OF CIVIL SUPPLIES OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CIVIL SUPPLIES THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.\ 2. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR) TALUK OFFICE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 3. VILLAGE OFFICER, THIRUMALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) 13741 of 2008 -------------------------------------------------------- Dated: AUGUST 25, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner submits that he was an Assistant Secretary in the office of the Commissioner of Civil Supplies and that he retired from service on 31.3.2002. It is stated that he had no liability outstanding and Ext.P4 no liability certificate was also issued to him. According to the petitioner all benefits including DCRG were released to him on the footing that he does not have any liability to the Department. 2. It is stated that despite all the above, he was issued Exts.P5 and P6 notices under the Revenue Recovery Act seeking to realise an amount of Rs.8,94,850/-. The main ground urged in this writ petition is that the said notices were issued without any notice to him. WP(C) 13741/08 2 3. The learned Government Pleader, on the other hand, points out that on deputation basis, petitioner was working in the Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation and that Exs.P5 and P6 were issued on the basis of the requisition issued by the said Corporation. 4. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, neither Ext.P5 nor Ext.P6 disclose on whose requisition the recovery proceedings are initiated and, if that be so, I am not in a position to find fault with the petitioner in not impleading the Civil Supplies Corporation. 5. A reading of the aforesaid revenue recovery notices shows that substantial liability is sought to be enforced against the petitioner. Any such enforcement of liability can only be with notice to the petitioner and his liability has to be quantified on that basis so that the petitioner also will have an opportunity to offer his explanation and resist the liability. In this case, since such an opportunity has not been given to the petitioner, I am not in a position to WP(C) 13741/08 3 sustain Exts.P5 and P6. Exts.P5 and P6 will therefore stand quashed. This writ petition is disposed of clarifying that it will be open to the respondents to proceed against the petitioner after giving him notice and opportunity of hearing before the liability, if any, is quantified. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE mt/-