IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2008 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1930 WA.No.60 of 2006(A) -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC.17501/2005 Dated 08/11/2005 .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER ----------------------------- C.P.SUKUMARAN NAIR, CHIRAKKAL HOUSE, CHERUVATTOOR, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM-686 691, (RETIRED HEADMASTER, GOVT. MODEL HIGH SCHOOL, MUVATTUPUZHA) BY ADV. SRI.B.S.KRISHNAN (SR.) SRI.K.ANAND (A.201) SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS ------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR(EDUCATION), ERNAKULAM. 3. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE DY. TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, KOTHAMANGALAM. 5. THE SECRETARY & COMMISSIONER, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SPL. GOVERNMENT PLEADER (FIN.) SRI.N.MANOJKUMAR THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J. B. KOSHY & K. P. BALACHANDRAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ W. A. No.60 of 2006 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 28th day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy, J Appellant/petitioner joined as High School Teacher in 1966 and retired as Headmaster on 31/03/1999. During his long tenure of service, he availed leave without allowance and worked abroad. Appellant/ petitioner got various higher grades and promotions during the above period also. By Ext.P2 letter, those benefits given to the appellant/petitioner was directed to be repaid and the amount excess paid was determined as Rs.60,145/-. When revenue recovery proceedings were initiated, appellant/petitioner approached this Court. Appellant/Petitioner's salary was re-calculated as per the pay revisions effected and Annexure-IV letter dt.19/12/06 W. A. No.60 of 2006 -2- produced along with this Writ Appeal show that even after recovery of Rs.60,145/-, petitioner is entitled to a balance amount of Rs.9,259/-. In the above circumstances, revenue recovery proceedings are quashed. 2. It is submitted by the appellant/ petitioner that even though revision was not correctly calculated and if that is calculated correctly he would be entitled to much more amount. Appellant/Petitioner can file detailed representation before the Government showing his entitlements. It is also submitted that DCRG due as per revised pension is Rs.1,37,074/-. Pre-revised DCRG is Rs.47,670/- and liability is Rs.60,145/-. If that be so, balance will be Rs.29,259/- and not Rs.9,259/- as mentioned in Annexure-IV. The admitted amount should be paid to the appellant within three months from today and the representation if filed as stated, it should be disposed of W. A. No.60 of 2006 -3- within three months from the date of receipt of representation. 3. This Writ Appeal is disposed of as above. J. B. KOSHY JUDGE K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JUDGE kns/-