IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 1ST OCTOBER 2010 / 9TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 25212 of 2010(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.A.RAVICHANDRAN, S/O.AIYYAPPILLAI, AGED 45, HEAD MASTER (UNDER SUSPENSION), GOVT.U.P.SCHOOL, PARATHODU, IDUKKI. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANILAL SRI.S.NIDHEESH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, IDUKKI AT THODUPUZHA. 2. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, NEDUMKANDAM, IDUKKI. 3. THE TREASURY OFFICER, SUB TRASURY, NEDUMKANDAM, IDUKKI. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.T.MUHAMOOD FOR R1,2,3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC 25212/2010 APPENDIX EXT.P1: COPY OF THE SUSPENSION ORDER NO.V4/61476/09/DPI DATED 5.5.2010 EXT.P2: COPY OF THE SALARY/SUBSTANCE ALLOWANCE BILL FOR THE MONTH OF JUNE EXT.P3: COPY OF THE SALARY/SUBSTANCE ALLOWANCE BILL FOR THE MONTH OF MAY EXT.P4: COPY OF THE ENDORSEMENT OF REJECTION AND DIRECTION OF THE TREASURY OFFICER. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF REMITTANCE OF RS.1,000/- DATED 7.4.2010. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF REMITTANCE OF RS.1,000/- DATED 6.5.2010. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE RECEIPT FOR MONTHLY EMI OF RS.1,000/- FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL EXT.P8: COPY OF THE RECEIPT FOR EMI OF RS.2,000/- DATED 3.8.2010. EXT.P9: COPY OF THE RECEIPT FOR MONTHLY EMI OF RS.1,000/- DATED 6.5.2010. EXT.P10: COPY OF THE RECEIPT FOR THE MONTHLY EMI OF RS.1,000/- DATED 7.4.2010. EXT.P11: COPY OF THE NON EMPLOYMENT CERTIFICATE FOR CLAIMING THE SUBSISTENCE ALLOWANCE DATED 31.5.2010. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.25212 of 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of October, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner, while working as Headmaster of Government U.P. School, Parathodu, Idukki, was placed under suspension as per Ext.P1 order dated 5.5.2010 passed by the Director of Public Instruction. In Ext.P1, it was made clear that the petitioner would be eligible for subsistence allowance as per rules. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Sub Treasury Officer raised an objection as evidenced by Ext.P4, under the impression that there are various recoveries to be made and that even from the subsistence allowance, the recovery could be effected. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Rule 55 of Part I KSR provides that an officer under suspension is entitled to the payments mentioned therein. Note 2 of Rule 55 WPC No.25212/2010 2 provides that the deductions shall be made from the subsistence allowance on account of the three categories mentioned in the note. Category No.(iii) is repayment of loans and advances taken from Government. The counsel relies on the definition of Government in Rule 12(11) of Part I KSR. Rule 12(11) provides that the Government means the Government of Kerala. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that though the petitioner is liable to pay, in his capacity as surety, the loans availed from various institutions, recovery cannot be made from the subsistence allowance payable to the petitioner, as no amount is due to the Government and to be recovered from the subsistence allowance as provided in note 2 of Rule 55 of Part I KSR. 4. A counter affidavit is filed by the first respondent. The relevant portion of the counter affidavit reads as follows : “5. It is most respectfully submitted that the petitioner is defaulter to the various financial institutions being a debtor/surety as has been intimated by the four financial institutions as on 6.2.2010. Accordingly, instructions have WPC No.25212/2010 3 been issued to the Sub Treasury Officer, Nedumkandom and Assistant Educational Officer, Nedumkandom vide order No.G1/2087/08 dated 6.2.2010 to effect the recoveries from his salary as detailed below. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name of Financial Arrears to be Monthly Institutions recovered as recovery on 6.2.2010 proposed ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Kerala State Development Rs.76276 Rs.4000 Corporation for X'ian Converts from SC and Recommended communities Ltd., Kottayam. 2. KSFE Ltd., Mundakayam. Rs.94648 Rs.3000 3. Kerala State Women's Rs.89735 Rs.3000 Development Corporation Ltd., Ernakulam. 4. SBT Elappara Br. Rs.23108 Rs.6000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It is respectfully submitted that this office had not issued any direction to the Sub Treasury Officer, Nedumkandom or the Assistant Educational Officer, Nedumkandom to effect the above financial recoveries from the subsistence allowance of the petitioner as alleged by Sri.P.A.Ravichandran. 6. It is also submitted that this office WPC No.25212/2010 4 had not issued any direction to the Sub Treasury Officer, Nedumkandom relating to the recoveries from the petitioner's salary other than the 4 cases mentioned above. Order No.B1/7353/09 dated 6.6.10 said to have been pointed out by the Sub Treasury Officer, Nedumkandom is not relating to this office. The Idukki District Co-operative Bank Ltd., Idukki has not intimated to this office any kind of financial recovery from the petitioner. Hence, this office is not in a position to submit anything in this regard as the matter is not relevant to this office. Moreover, the contention of this office in this regard is that Government is the only authority capable of clarifying a rule. 7. It is most respectfully submitted that this office had issued directions to the Sub Treasury Officer, Nedumkandom and Assistant Educational Officer, Nedumkandom vide No.G1/2087/2008 dated 6.2.2010 and No.G1/18286/2008 dated 14.5.10 to effect the recoveries due to the four financial institutions only from the salary of the petitioner. 8. It is further submitted that the default committed by the petitioner to the WPC No.25212/2010 5 aforesaid institutions are not recoverable under Rule 55 Note 2 of Part I KSR. In view of the above facts and circumstances, this Honourable Court may be pleased to pass appropriate orders for securing the ends of justice.” 5. In the light of the facts disclosed in the counter affidavit, there cannot be any recovery from the subsistence allowance payable to the petitioner towards the loans as mentioned in paragraph 4 of the counter affidavit. Accordingly, the objection raised in Ext.P4 is quashed. The petitioner shall be paid the subsistence allowance without recovering any amount in respect of the loans mentioned in the counter affidavit. The Writ Petition is allowed as above. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl