IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 29TH JUNE 2010 / 8TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 10812 of 2010(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LIMITED, 'BHADRATHA', THRISSUR. 2. THE SENIOR MANAGER(R.R.), KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LIMITED, 'BHADRATHA', THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN RESPONDENT(S): 1. V.K.BABU, VANCHIPURAKKAL, 'SARANG', THURUTHI P.O., CHANGANASSERY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. V.P.SUBRAHMANIAN, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LIMITED, 'BHADRATHA', THRISSUR. 3. K.B.SUDHEER BABU, REGIONAL MANAGER (RETD.), KUNNEL HOUSE, KUMBALANGI P.O., KOCHI. 4. STATE OF KERALA - REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE KERALA LOK AYUKTA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. ADV. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR FOR R3 SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. FOR R1 GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K. RAMESH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONERS EXHIBITS: W.P.C.NO. 10812/2010. -------------------------------------------------------------------- EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF PETITION. EXT.P2 COUNTER STATEMENT BEFORE LOK AYUKTA. EXT.P3 STATEMENT FILED BY R3. EXT.P4 ORDER DT. 14-1-2010 OF KERALA LOK AYUKTA. RESPONDENTS' EXIBITS: ------------------------------------ EXT.R1(a) TRUE COPY OF FORMAT FOR VALUATION. [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 10812 of 2010 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 29th day of June, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd., and its senior manager at Thrissur. They are challenging Ext. P4 order of the Lok Ayukta, whereby the 1st respondent was directed to be paid the balance DCRG withheld on allegation of liability due from the 1st respondent. The primary contention raised by the petitioners is that the Lok Ayukta does not have jurisdiction to issue any directions. As per the Kerala Lok Ayukta Act, they can only submit a report before the appropriate authority and it is for the appropriate authority to decide as to whether it is to be implemented or not. 2. I have heard both sides. 3. Ext. P4 proceeds on the basis that the withholding of DCRG was not after complying with the procedure prescribed in Note 2 of Rule 3 of Part III of KSR. The petitioners could not satisfy me that the procedure as contemplated in Rule 3 of Part III of KSR has been complied with before deciding to withhold the amount from the 1st respondent's DCRG. As such, I do not find any merit in the contentions of the petitioners against the findings in Ext. P4. But, technically, the petitioners may be correct in contending that the Lok Ayukta has only power to file a report and not to issue any direction. In the above circumstances, the petitioners shall consider Ext. P4 as a report of the Lok Ayukta as contemplated under the Kerala Lok Ayukta Act and take steps to get the same implemented to disburse the balance DCRG due to the 1st respondent with interest at 6% with W.P.C. No. 10812/2010 -: 2 :- effect from 13-5-2009 as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/