IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 13TH JUNE 2008 / 23RD JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 11019 of 2004(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ K.V. GEORGE, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE (RETIRED), KULNNGATTIL HOUSE, KADACKANAD P.O., VIA-KOLANCHERRY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE DIRECTORATE OF AGRICULTURE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE PRINCIPAL AGRICULTURE OFFICER, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 4. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY) TALUK OFFICE, KUNNATHUNAD, PERUMBAVOOR. 5. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MAZAHUVANNUR VILLAGE, AIKARANADU NORTH, MAZHUVANNUR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY G.P. SRI. TEKCHAND. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED 30.6.1997 ADDRESSED TO THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH THE LIABILITY CERTIFICATE ATTACHED THERETO. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 16.7.1997 ADDRESSED TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED 26.7.2000 EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT UNDER RULE 7 OF THE RR ACT DATED 23.2.2004 EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENTUNDER RULE 14 OF THE RR ACT DATED 23.2.2004 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO.11019 OF 2004 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner retired from service as Deputy Director of Agriculture on 31.10.1990. According to the Government Pleader, department has been demanding various amounts due from the petitioner during his service from 1989 onwards. However, petitioner retired without settling the arrears. Consequently DCRG was retained at the time of retirement and balance payments were made to the petitioner . Inspite of retirement in October 1993, petitioner has not chosen to claim DCRG for 11 years until W.P. is filed on 29.3.2004. WPC itself is filed only challenging recovery proceedings initiated for recovery of balance amount of around Rs. 75,000/- after adjusting the retained DCRG against liability of the petitioner. Petitioner is relying on Note 3, Rule3, Part III, of KSR which provides for recovery of liability from DCRG within three years from the date of retirement. However, it is submitted by Government Pleader that liability was fixed even when the petitioner was in service and petitioner dodged payment to the 2 Government. I do not think at this distance of time any fresh enquiry should be ordered because petitioner retired 15 years back. However, since petitioner has not cared to claim DCRG for 11 years after retirement, petitioner was well aware of the liability due to the Govt. Therefore adjustment of DCRG against liabilsity is upheld. However, having regard to the inordinate delay on the part of respondents in initiating recovery proceedings for recovery of the balance amount, I cancel the balance demand against the petitioner and prohibit the respondents from recovering any further amount from the petitioner towards loss caused to the Government while he was in service. W.P. is disposed of as above. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge kk 3