IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 33686 of 2009(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ K.S.RATHEESH, MUNICIPAL ENGINEER, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, KALAMASSERY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN SRI.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM) SRI.MATHEW SUNNY RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR, URBAN AFFAIRS, DIRECTORATEOF URBAN AFFAIRS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.NANDAKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 33686 OF 2009 (E) ===================== Dated this the 24th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is an Assistant Engineer, Local Self Government Department. At the time when the petitioner was serving at Kasargod during 2004-05, he had awarded works for digging 38 wells. According to the petitioner, the rate fixed was based on the 2004 revision. However, he was issued Ext.P3 memo of charges on the allegation that the petitioner had spent Rs.1,43,414/- in excess of the permissible amount. Petitioner submitted Ext.P4 explanation justifying the fixation of Rs.20,742/- per well. According to the petitioner, he did not hear anything after Exts.P3 and P4. But, however, he was issued Ext.P5 requiring him to pay an amount of Rs.71,707/-. Aggrieved by Ext.P5, he filed Ext.P6 appeal to the 1st respondent and during the pendency of the appeal, according to him, steps are being taken to recover the amount. It is in these circumstances the writ petition is filed. Thus, it is evident that the appeal filed by the petitioner against Ext.P5 is pending. In view of this, I feel that the recovery now threatened is premature. WPC 33686/09 :2 : Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:- (1) That the 1st respondent shall dispose of Ext.P6 with notice to the petitioner and as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 3 months of production of a copy of this judgment. (2) In the meantime, further proceedings of recovery pursuant to Ext.P5, shall be kept in abeyance. (3) Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition before the 1st respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp