IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2010 / 30TH POUSHA 1931 WA.No. 191 of 2009() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN OP.14999/2002 Dated 26/11/2008 .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT N.1,3 AND 4 IN THE OP. ----------------------------------------------- 1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, THE OFFICER OF THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (AUDIT),KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SUB TREASURY OFFICER, SUB TREASURY, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.BENNY GERVASIS. RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT NO.2 IN THE OP ------------------------------------------------------- 1. M.R.MOHANACHANDRAN, USUS,KAKKANAD, KOCHI. 2. THE REGISTRAR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.KRB.KAIMAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R2 SRI.B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL FOR R2 SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY FOR R1 SMT.N.SANTHA FOR R1 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ. ------------------------------ W.A.No.191/2009 ------------------------------ Dated this, the 20th day of January, 2010 JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The respondents 1, 3 and 4 in the Original Petition are the appellants. The 1st respondent herein was the petitioner. 2. The brief facts of the case are the following: The 1st respondent was an employee of this Court. He joined service as Assistant Grade II on 27.2.1968 and retired from service as Selection Grade Assistant on 28.2.2002. A few months before his retirement, the audit party detected certain irregularities in the fixation of his pay. By Ext.P3 communication dated 17.5.2001, this was brought to the notice of the High Court. The High Court explained how the 1st respondent was given fixation at various stages, by Ext.P4 communication dated 22.9.2001. Finally, the High Court requested that in view of the long time gap in raising the objection, the same may be dropped, especially in view of the WA No.191/2009 - 2 - fact that the employee is at the fag end of his career. But, by Ext.P5 communication dated 9.10.2001, the Senior Audit Officer rejected the explanation and upheld the objection in the pay fixation. The 1st respondent approached this Court and this Court by Ext.P6 judgment, directed the Government to reconsider the matter. To enable the Government to do that, the 1st respondent preferred Ext.P7 representation. The High Court offered its comments as per Ext.P9. The Government, after hearing both sides, issued Ext.P10 order, sustaining Ext.P5. Ext.P12 is the consequential communication issued by the High Court to the 1st respondent on 11.6.2002, indicating the amount to be recovered from him. In the Original Petition the 1st respondent challenged Exts.P3, P5 and P10. The learned Single Judge, after hearing both sides, allowed the O.P., taking the view that after the long delay, the rectification should not have been made. The aggrieved respondents have, therefore, preferred this appeal. 3. We heard Sri.Benny Gervasis, learned senior Government Pleader for the appellants, Sri.K.R.B.Kaimal, WA No.191/2009 - 3 - learned senior counsel for the High Court and Sri.S.P.Aravindakshan Pillay, learned counsel for the 1st respondent. The only point that arises for decision is whether the recovery is justifiable, as the irregularity in the fixation of pay was detected after the lapse of a very long period. Public interest demands recovery of public money paid wrongly to the 1st respondent. We think, the excess amount paid to the 1st respondent till the date of Ext.P3 dated 17.5.2001 should not be recovered. But, once the defect is detected and the same is finalised after hearing both sides, the Government should be given freedom to stop payment of the amount and also to recover the excess amount, if any, paid after 17.5.2001. In view of the above position, the Writ Appeal is allowed in part. The excess amount paid to the 1st respondent up to 17.5.2001 shall not be recovered. The salary can be reduced from the month of May, 2001. The re-fixation of pay done and the consequential action taken by the appellants are sustained. If any benefits are payable to the 1st respondent in the light of this judgment, the same shall be paid by the competent WA No.191/2009 - 4 - authority among the respondents within two months from the date of production/receipt of a copy of this judgment. K. Balakrishnan Nair, Judge. C.T.Ravikumar, Judge. nm.