IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 17TH KARTHIKA 1933 WA.No. 1489 of 2011() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.13150/2007 Dated 16/06/2011 .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT 2-4 ----------------------------------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE LIBRARY COUNCIL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-33, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SECRETARY, DISTRICT LIBRARY COUNCIL, KOZHIKODE. 3. THE ACCOUNT OFFICER, KERALA STATE LIBRARY COUNCIL, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER'S LEGAL HEIRS & R1: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. SMT.K.C.RAMANI, KUNNUMMEL HOUSE, KOLLAM, KOYILANDI, KOZHIKODE. 2. AMRITHA D.NAIR, KUNNUMMEL HOUSE, KOLLAM, KOYILANDI, KOZHIKODE. 3. SAI RAM D.NAIR, KUNNUMMEL HOUSE, KOLLAM, KOYILANDI, KOZHIKODE. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R4 BY SR.GOVT.PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, Ag. CJ. & K.VINOD CHANDRAN, J ---------------------------------------------- W.A.No. 1489 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, Ag.CJ. The Writ Petition is filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge declaring liability of respondents 1 to 3 at 10% of the D.C.R.G payable to them as legal heirs of deceased Librarian and also directing the appellants to recover 10% of the D.C.R.G each from all the employees, who were working in the Library, including the Secretary during the period when loss of books happened. 2. We have heard counsel for the appellants, counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 3 and also the Government Pleader. We have also gone through the judgment of the learned Single Judge. 3. Appellants do not dispute the first part of the judgment limiting liability of respondents 1 to 3 as legal heirs of deceased Librarian at 10% of the D.C.R.G and directing release of the balance D.C.R.G of the deceased withheld. However, appellants' grievance is against the direction of the learned Single Judge to recover 10% of the D.C.R.G from each and every employees of the Library, who worked in the Library during the period when the books were lost. 4. We find force in the contention of the appellants that without any enquiry whatsoever and finding of individual responsibility of the WA.1489/11 2 employees of the Library for the loss caused to it, this Court cannot order recovery from D.C.R.G. No doubt, Librarian is, in principle, responsible as he is the custodian of the books. However, the same does not follow that every employee worked in the Library is responsible for the loss of books that has happened. In the absence of any enquiry and finding with notice to the persons involved, we do not think, this Court is justified in directing recovery of D.C.R.G from all employees and the Secretary of the Library. Consequently, the Writ Appeal is allowed in part, vacating that part of the judgment of the learned Single Judge directing recovery from employees. However, since counsel for respondents 1 to 3 submitted that they are yet to decide whether to file appeal or not, we do not want to go into the correctness of the finding on the first part of the judgment, which the respondents are free to contest. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE vgs