IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 9TH JANUARY 2009 / 19TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 18164 of 2008(K) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER ------------------------- G. KRISHNAPPA, S/O. BOLIYA POOJARY, AGED 63, PRAGATHI, LAKSHMIVENKATESH ROAD, BEERANTHBAIL, ADKATHBAIL VILLAGE, P.O. KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SRI.K.LAKSHMINARAYANAN SMT.SATHYA SHREEPRIYA RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, TRIVANDRUM (REP. BY ITS SECRETARY) 3. LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMNET OF KERALA, TRIVANDRUM. 4. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KASARAGOD. 5. TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, KASARAGOD. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.NANDAKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.18164/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE MEMO OF CHARGES INCLUDING STATEMENT OF ALLEGATION DT. 4.9.01 ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF 4TH RESPONDENT. P2:- COPY OF THE EXPLANATION DT. 21.9.01 SUBMITTED BY VASANTHI . P3:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.GO(RT0 NO.226/02/RD DT. 30.1.02 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P4:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.GO(RT) 3675/03/RD DT, 21.11.03 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT. P5:- COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE DT. 11.11.05 OF VASANTHI. P6:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT. 2.8.06 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. P7:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.GO(RT) NO.20/08 /RD DT. 4.1.08 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P8:- COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.P-14/PENA/392/BL/06-07 DT. 22.11.06 ISSUED BY THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL. P9:- COPY OF THE INTIMATION SLIP BEARING NO.P-14/PENA/392/BL/06-07/1109 DT. 6.12.06 ISSUED BY THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. P10:- COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.A1-19675/05 DT. 10.7.08 ISSUED BY THE TAHSILDAR KASARAGOD. P11:- COPY OF THE LETTER NO.A1/10675/05 DT. 11.7.08 ISSUED BY THE TAHSILDAR , KASARAGOD. P12:- COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 21.7.08 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER. P13:- COPY OF THE LETTER NO.INS/GR3/4333/07 DT. 28.6.08 ISSUED BY THE KERALA STATE INSURANCE DEPARTMENT , THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. P14:- COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.F3-26492/06 DT. 24.7.08 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE tss T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.18164/2008-K ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 9th day of January, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the legal heir of one Smt.Vasanthi, who expired on 24/10/2005. She was working as a Village Officer. Based on certain Press reports alleging irregularity in felling and transport of rosewood trees, an enquiry was conducted and disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the deceased Smt.Vasanthi and three other officers. Memo of charges were issued, which is evidenced by Ext.P1. Ext.P2 is the explanation submitted by her disputing any role in the matter. She was suspended pending disciplinary action as per Ext.P3 and, later by Ext.P4 she was reinstated in service. After the death of the wife, the petitioner filed Ext.P6 representation before the Government seeking regularisation of the period of suspension and to disburse the leave terminal surrender benefits and all other benefits such as family pension, benefits under group insurance scheme etc. Ultimately, by Ext.P7, the Government finalised the disciplinary proceedings against the Officers concerned. As regards the W.P.(C) No.18164/2008 -:2:- deceased wife of the petitioner, an amount of Rs.1,33,512/- have been quantified with an observation that the same will be recovered from the legal heirs by invoking a civil suit. Ext.P7 is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. The petitioner attacks Ext.P7 on various grounds. It is pointed out that as regards the evidence regarding the auction sales are concerned they are not sufficient to clothe any liability on the legal heirs since no findings have been rendered in Ext.P7 adversely to the deceased officer. What is stated is that the charges levelled against Smt.Vasanthi were partially proved. There is a further contention that before quantifying the loss and before ordering recovery against the petitioner, no opportunity was given to him to contest the matter. 3. The respondents have filed a detailed counter affidavit in the matter explaining the action taken by them. Regarding the non disbursement of the pensionary benefits, it is stated in the counter affidavit that as the disciplinary action is finally settled, the Tahsildar, Kasaragod has been directed to disburse the pensionary benefits to the legal heir of the deceased Vasanthi. W.P.(C) No.18164/2008 -:3:- 4. Going by Exts.P8, P9 and P11, produced along with the reply affidavit, it is found that various benefits have been sanctioned to the legal heir. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that only the amounts toward the surrender of earned leave have been disbursed as on today. 5. Since the order Ext.P7 holds the petitioner liable for the amount in question, that should have been done only after hearing him. The petitioner is put in dark about the findings in the report as well as the reasons for fixing the liability against the deceased. These are matters in respect of which, ultimately, if a civil suit is filed, he will not be able to contest effectively since already the liability has been fixed as per Ext.P7. Therefore, Ext.P7 stands quashed as far as the fixation of the liability against the petitioner is concerned. There will be a direction to the first respondent to hear the petitioner and pass appropriate orders after furnishing all materials including the report of enquiry, for enabling him to effectively submit an application against the liability imposed on him. The same shall be done within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment. 6. As far as the amounts which are yet to be paid based on the sanctioning orders, namely, family pension, benefits under group insurance W.P.(C) No.18164/2008 -:4:- scheme DCRG etc., there will be a direction to the third and fourth respondents to see that they are disbursed to the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of production of the copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms