IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH AUGUST 2009 / 21ST SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 9158 of 2007(M) PETITIONER(S): NAFEESATHU BEEVI,PALAVILA HOUSE, ATTINPURAM,PANAVOOR P.O,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.SREEDHARAN NAIR SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR RESPONDENT(S): 1. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (FINANCE)SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. PRINCIPAL,GOVERNMENT MODEL G.H.S PATTOM,THIRUVANANTAPURAM. 4. KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD,REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, REG.OFFICE BHADRATHA PB NO.510,MUSEUM ROAD, THRISSUR. 5. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. E.M.HUSSAIN,THRIKKATIL VEEDU, PANAYAMUTTAM P.O,NEDUMANGAD. 7. MUHAMMED SHAFEEK ASSISTANT CLERK, KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD, VELLARADA BRANCH. 8. BINU KUMAR,PEON,GOVERNMETN B.H.S.S.CHALA 9. SALIM,SALMAN MANZIL,KARIKKZHI,PANAVOOR, P.O,NEDUMANGAD. ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN, SC, K.S.F.E., LTD. FOR R.4 GOVT. PLEADER SMT. SMITHS SUKUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: WPC. NO. 9158/07 ---------------------------------------------------------------- EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DT. 18-9-2006. EXT.P2 NOTICE DT. 18-9-2006. EXT.P3 CIRCULAR DT. 22-5-2003. EXT.P4 REPORT DT. 7-9-2002. EXT.P5 LETTER DT. 31-12-2005. EXT.P6 REPRESENTATION DT. 4-8-2006. EXT.P7 LETTER DT. 17-10-2006. EXT.P8 JUDGMENT IN W.P.C.NO. 39791/2003. EXT.P9 LETTER DT. 7-6-2008. EXT.P10 LETER DT. 31-5-2008. EXT.P11 LETTER DT. 28-5-2008 EXT.P12 LETTER DT. 25-5-2008. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: ----------------------------------- EXT.R4(a) AGREEMENT DT. 1-11-2004. [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 9158 of 2007 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 12th August, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner was a surety for chitty amount disbursed to the 6th respondent by the 4th respondent. Since the 4th respondent defaulted payment of the instalments of the chitty, the 5th respondent initiated revenue recovery proceedings for recovery of the amount from the DCRG of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, no amount can be recovered from her DCRG since she had not given any written consent to the KSFE for recovery of the amount from her retirement benefits. 2. The 4th respondent has filed a counter affidavit producing Ext. R4(a) agreement executed by the petitioner, wherein the petitioner had agreed that the amounts may be recovered from her terminal and other benefits. The petitioner does not dispute Ext. R4(a) now. Therefore, the petitioner cannot succeed in the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Needless to say, the petitioner can proceed against the principal debtor for recovery of the amounts recovered from her DCRG. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/