IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS TUESDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2009 / 3RD CHAITHRA 1931 WA.No. 1217 of 2006() ------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN OP.32611/2000 Dated 17/01/2006 .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENTS IN O.P. ----------------------- 1. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A&E), KERALA, BRANCH OFFICE AT KOZHIKODE. 2. THE HEADMASTER, GOVERNMENT L.P. SCHOOL, PERUMPALLY P.O., MANIPPARA, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.N.MANOJ KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER IN O.P. ---------------------------- K.R.GOPINATH, RETIRED TEACHER, 'KALPANA', ULICKEL P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. ADV. MR.O.V.MANIPRASAD THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ========================================= W.A.No.1217 of 2006 =============================== Dated this the 24th day of March, 2009. J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. The respondents in the writ petition are the appellants herein. The petitioner is the respondent herein. He approached this Court seeking the following reliefs: “(i) To issue a writ of certiorari quashing Ext.P4. (ii) To issue a writ of mandamus, order or direction directing the first respondent to disburse the amount of Rs.12,907/- and interest for the said amount at the rate of 18% per annum from February 1998 onwards under the G.P.F. Account with No. EDN/83235 of the petitioner forthwith. (iii) To issue a writ of mandamus, order or direction directing the 1st respondent to disburse the balance amount accrued as interest to the G.P.F. Account of the petitioner, from March 1998 onwards after deducting the amount paid to him”. 2. The learned Single Judge directed to settle the amount due to the petitioner in the light of endorsement in Ext.P1 and also to pay the statutory interest. Therefore, the respondents have preferred this appeal. According to them, in March 1985, a loan amount of Rs.3,000/- was availed by the respondent/petitioner from the P.F. Account. The same was not debited in his account. So the petitioner was getting interest for the said amount and also interest for the installments paid by him. The W.A.No.1217 of 2006 2 said irregularity was detected at the time of closure of the loan account and Ext.P4 communication was issued to the petitioner. 3. We heard counsel on both sides. 4. Going by Exts.P1, P2 and P4, we find nothing wrong in the action of the appellants. The petitioner had not filed any reply affidavit denying the averments of the appellants that an amount of Rs.3,000/- taken by way of loan by the writ petitioner was not debited in the P.F. Account. If that be so, the said statement can be taken as true. Therefore, the action taken by the respondents to recover the said amount from the petitioner at the time of closure of the loan account cannot be said to be illegal. Going by Exts.P2 and P4, we notice that what has been done was only the correction of a mistake. Accordingly, the writ appeal is allowed and the original petition is dismissed. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE. bkn/-