IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2009 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 13372 of 2009(N) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- P.K. GEE VARGHESE, ASST. ENGINEER, PWD ROADS DIVISION, HARIPPAD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADVS. MR.T.MADHU, MR.B.K.RAJAGOPAL. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. BARANIKAVU BLOCK PANCHAYATH, BARANIKAVU, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (HG), LOCAL FUND AUDIT, ALAPPUZHA. 3. THE DIRECTOR, LOCAL FUND AUDIT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-33. 4. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ALAPPUZHA. 6. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, PWD ADMINISTRATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 7. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, KERALA. R1 BY ADV. MR. C.RASHEED BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. ANTONY MUKKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/05/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.13372/2009 N APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE AUDIT REPORT FOR THE YEAR 2003-2004 IN RESPECT OF THE ABOVE WORK. P2: COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DTD. 8/09/2008 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P3: COPY OF THE REPLY DTD. 24/09/2008 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P4: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DTD. 28/03/2009 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P5: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD. 23/03/2009 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P6: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DTD. 20/09/2005 OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.13372 of 2009 -------------------------------------- Dated 26th May, 2009 JUDGMENT Heard Sri.T.Madhu, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.C.Rasheed, the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent and Sri.Antony Mukkath, the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 2 to 7. 2. Ext.P5 order passed by the Director of Local Fund Audit surcharging the petitioner and Ext.P4 surcharge certificate issued by the Director of Local Fund Audit are under challenge in this writ petition. Ext.P5 order discloses that it has been issued under sub section (1) of Section 16 of the Local Fund Audit Act, 1994. Sub section (3) of Section 16 states that any person aggrieved by disallowance, surcharge or charge made may, within one month after he has received or been served with the decision of the auditor, apply to the District Court, to set aside such disallowance, surcharge or charge and the court, after taking such evidence as is necessary, may confirm, modify or remit such disallowance, surcharge or charge. 3. Sub section (3) of Section 16 of the Local Fund Audit Act confers on the petitioner the right to file an appeal challenging Ext.P5 in the District Court. The petitioner thus has an effective alternate WP(C).No.13372/2009 2 remedy. Ext.P5 order is dated 23.3.2009. The period of one month prescribed under sub section (3) of Section 16 of the Local Fund Audit Act for filing an appeal has expired. However, having regard to the fact that the petitioner has filed this writ petition in this Court, I am inclined to dispose of this writ petition with the direction that in the event of the petitioner filing an appeal before the competent District Court within two weeks from today, the District Court shall entertain the appeal as one filed within time and pass orders thereon in accordance with law. In order to enable the petitioner to move the appeal and seek interim orders from the District Court, the proceedings if any initiated against the petitioner for recovery shall be kept in abeyance for a period of two weeks from today. The writ petition is disposed of as above. P.N.RAVINDRAN Judge TKS