IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2008 / 24TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 16390 of 2004(A) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- P.S.SUBAIDA, C.I OF POLICE (RETD), VANITHA CELL, ALAPPUZHA, ANJEL ALAYAM, VATTEKUNNAM, EDAPPALLY NORTH POST, COCHIN - 24. BY ADV. SMT.V.P.SEEMANDINI (SR.), SRI.T.R.RAJESH. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, ACCOUNTS DEPARTMENT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE SENIOR ACCOUNTS OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A&E) KERALA, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE ADDITIONAL SUB TREASURY OFFICER, ERNAKULAM. 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALAPPUZHA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. M.P. SREEKRISHNAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.16390/2004-A: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE REQUEST DTD. 30/04/2002 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE AUTHORISATION SLIP DTD. NIL/12/2002 ISSUED BY THE R.2. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 18/03/2003 ISSUED BY THE R.2. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE CORRECTED AUTHORISATION SLIP DTD. NIL/12/2002. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 02/04/2004 OF THE R.2. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// prv. K.M.JOSEPH, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WP.(C) No. 16390 of 2004 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 14th day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is a retired Circle Inspector of Police. She retired on 31.5.2002. She requested for necessary steps for closure of Provident Fund account to the Superintendent of Police vide Ext.P1. Pursuant to the request, the second respondent issued authorisation in favour of the Superintendent of Police, Alappuzha authorising to withdraw an amount of Rs.2,47,870/- with interest upto March, 2003. Petitioner approached the third respondent. She was informed by the Sub Treasury Officer that since the authorisation letter was issued in favour of the Superintendent of Police, Alappuzha, he is not in a position to release the amount in favour of the petitioner. She made a written request to the second respondent demanding correction. In pursuance of that request, the second respondent caused to issue a letter dated 18.3.2003 to correct the name of the disbursing officer as the petitioner instead of Superintendent of Police, Alappuzha (Ext.P3), and finally the amount was received on 31.3.2004. She received Ext.P5 letter dated 2.4.2004 issued by the second respondent calling upon her to return the G.P.F. Closure authorisation slip dated 31.3.2003. According to her, she ought to have received the amount on 31.5.2002, the date of her retirement. Therefore, she claims interest on the WPC.16390/2004. 2 provident fund amount from March, 2003 to March, 2004, from the date of sanctioning the authorisation order till the date of disbursal of the provident fund amount. 2. I notice that the petitioner has not made any demand seeking interest. No doubt, what is stated in the counter affidavit is essentially that by oversight the authorisation letter was issued in favour of the Superintendent of Police, Alappuzha and the mistake came to the notice of the Accountant General when the petitioner pointed it out. In such circumstances, the petitioner is seeking a writ of mandamus without making a demand. In such circumstances, I feel that the ends of justice will be met if the petitioner is permitted to represent the matter before the first respondent claiming interest for the period in question. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that if the petitioner makes a representation within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment before the first respondent, a decision on the same will be taken by the first respondent within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the same. (K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE) sb