IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2011 / 21ST ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 18918 of 2009(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- M.NESAN, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O. LATE MR. KOCHAN MANUEL, SECTION OFFICER (RETD.), UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, RESIDING AT SANJALI, 404 - B.P.NAGAR, PEYAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.MOHAMMED SHIRAZ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, KERALA UNIVERSITY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE FINANCE OFFICER, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. KERALA LOK AYUKTA, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV.SHRI M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR FOR R1 & R2(SC) ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN WPC.18918/09 PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: COPY OF REPRESENTATION DT.7.5.07. EXT.P2: COPY OF LETTER DT.2.7.07 OF REGISTRAR. EXT.P3: COY OF LETTER DT.4.7.07 OF PETITIONER. EXT.P4: COPY OF COMPAINT NO.1815/07 AND ANNEXURES THERETO. EXT.P5: COPY OF STATEMENT OF FACTS FILED BY THE REGISTRAR DT.20.2.08. EXT.P6: COPY OF ORDER DT.24.12.08. EXT.P7: COPY OF ORDER DT.5.2.09 O COMPLAINT NO.1845/07. EXT.P8: COPY OF REQUEST DT.12.3.09. EXT.P9: COPY OF LETTER DT.27.3.09 OF PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER. EXT.P10: COPY OF NOTE TO FINANCE OFFICER. EXT.P11: COPY OF LIABILITY CERTIFICATE DT.18.1.08. True Copy P.A.to Judge dsn T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.18918 of 2009 -------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 13th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2011 J U D G M E N T The proceedings leading to the fixation of liability against the petitioner after his retirement is under challenge in this Writ Petition. 2. The petitioner retired from service of the University as Section Officer on 31.5.2006. Exhibit P2 is the intimation given to the petitioner showing certain liabilities. The liability shown is to the tune of Rs.20,44,541/-. The petitioner gave a reply in respect of each items. With regard to medical allowances and liability to the Housing Co-operative Society, he agreed that the same can be recovered from his retirement benefits. With regard to the major item, namely governing expenses for the conduct of Valuation Camps, the petitioner submits that he has already given the details of expenditure to the University. Since no further action was taken, the petitioner approached the Upa Lok Ayukta by filing a complaint. An objection was filed by the Registrar of the University as per Exhibit P5. In the meanwhile, W.P.(C)No.18918/09 -2- provisional pension was sanctioned to the petitioner as per Exhibit P6. The Upa Lok Ayukta dismissed the complaint as per Exhibit P7 order. 3. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Administrative Officer for conducting Centralised Valuation Camp for pre-degree course at the M.G.College, Thiruvananthapuram in the year 1996 as well as in 1998. In 1999 he was similarly appointed at St.Joseph's Higher Secondary School, Thiruvananthapuram. 4. It is averred in the Writ Petition that the Administrative Officer appointed is from the University, for conducting Centralised Valuation Camp. He will be given money for meeting expenses of the Camp. He will have to pay the remuneration of teachers, TA and DA bills and other administrative expenses from the funds alloted by the University. But before making the payment the bills are audited by the audit party deputed by the University and only bills passed by the audit party are paid. The acquittance of payee is taken on the acquittance roll prepared by the audit party. The payments W.P.(C)No.18918/09 -3- of the teachers which comprise about 90% of the total expenditure are made through cheques. The balance amount remaining with the Administrative Officer is remitted to the Kerala University. After the Centralised Valuation Camp is wound up, the bills along with the acquittance roll signed by the payee are submitted to the C.V. Section of the University for post payment audit. At the time of handing over the bills, acquittance roll and challan for deposit of balance amount to the Section, there is no practise of giving any receipt also. The spot audit party will give an audit report to the Audit Section about the payments sanctioned by it and the expenses incurred in the Camp. 5. According to the petitioner, he submitted all the bills , acquittance roll and challan for deposit of balance amount in respect of 1996, 1998 and 1999 Valuation Camps to the Section in June 1999. Subsequently, he was deputed to the Directorate of Higher Secondary Education and served there from 1999 to 21.3.2003. It is also averred in the Writ Petition that an amount of Rs.2,44,081/- has been remitted back to the Kerala University W.P.(C)No.18918/09 -4- fund as per proper receipts which is not disputed by the University also. 6. The stand taken by the University in their counter affidavit is that as per the existing practice a lump sum is placed at the disposal of the Administrative Officer as provisional advance for the disbursement of TA/DA, remuneration, etc. due to the examiners on the specific condition that the advance so placed at the disposal is to be regularised. It is their case also that service of the audit party from the Head Office is made available in the Centralised Valuation Camp on request for processing the claims of the Examiners towards TA/DA, remuneration, etc. and to prepare an acquittance roll. What is contended is that in the absence of the acquittance roll, it cannot be ascertained whether all the payments are effected or not. So, the plea raised is that these documents are not seen submitted by the petitioner. 7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the University. 8. After the matter was heard on an earlier occasion, this W.P.(C)No.18918/09 -5- Court directed the University to produce the copy of the audit statement of the year 1996, 1998 and 1999 in I.A.No.12454/2011. An additional counter affidavit has been filed by the University wherein it is stated in paragraph No.4 that even though a thorough search was made, they are not able to trace out any records relating to the audit statement. Therefore, they are unable to produce the statement of accounts prepared by the audit team, which relates to the Centralised Valuation Camp for the year 1996, 1998 and 1999. 9. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there had not been any complaint from any teachers or from the University that the amounts towards remuneration and TA/DA of the teachers who attended the Valuation Camp have not been paid by the petitioner. It is pointed out that in the normal course of conduct of the duties of the petitioner, all the payments have been effected as certified by the audit party and the balance amount has been remitted to the University fund which position also stands accepted by the University. It is pointed out that at this distance of time, the petitioner cannot be asked to produce W.P.(C)No.18918/09 -6- the documents as he has already produced the documents at the relevant time and he has not retained any such documents. There was no complaint against him in the matter at any point of time. 10. Evidently, this is a case where the payments are effected on the basis of the cheques issued by the University. Therefore, it would have been possible for the University to cross-check the details with the Branch of the State Bank of Travancore within the University premises with regard to the payments effected, in case they wanted to do so. 11. The learned Standing Counsel for the University submitted that even though attempts were made with the Bank, such details were not readily made available. 12. Evidently, therefore it is a case where the entire amount which have been utilised for the Valuation Camps, is now treated as liability on the part of the petitioner. The system of conduct of Valuation Camps and the method of payments effected, as already discussed, would show that the petitioner cannot on his own make the payment, as it has to be certified by W.P.(C)No.18918/09 -7- the audit party. All the payments were fully verified and certified by the audit party which fact is also not disputed. The absence of acquittance roll therefore is now taken as the sole reason for putting the entire burden on the petitioner. Of course, the Audit Wing of the University itself is conducting the audit and the audit statements of the years 1996, 1998 and 1999 were bound to be maintained by the University itself. That also was not done and it is pointed out that the records could not be traced out in spite of a thorough search. 13. Therefore, it cannot be conclusively said that the petitioner can be saddled with the liability. The liability is now said to be saddled against the petitioner only on the basis of absence of acquittance roll in the University itself. As rightly pointed out by the petitioner, till his retirement, not even one communication was given to the petitioner asking for any details with regard to the conduct of the Valuation Camps or with regard to the payments effected. The liability was fixed without any notice. The balance amount of advance received had been remitted as evident from Exhibits P4(8), P4(9), P4(10), P4(11) W.P.(C)No.18918/09 -8- and P4(12) documents totalling to Rs.2,44,481/-. The corresponding dates on which the payments have been received are evident from these documents and the pay slip numbers are also mentioned in the certificates issued by the University. Therefore, if at all anything had to be done by the petitioner at that point of time, the University could have required him to do so. That also lends credence to the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that all the documents were properly maintained and submitted to the University. There is no case for the University that any of the teachers who attended the Valuation Camps were not paid amount by the petitioner. 14. Therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioner can be saddled with the liability for the amounts covered by the conduct of the Valuation Camps. Exhibit P2 as well as Exhibit P11, which is the final liability statement to that extent cannot be supported and the same are quashed. The order passed by the Upa Lok Ayukta is hence set aside. 15. With regard to the other liabilities towards medical allowance and payment to the House Construction Society, rent W.P.(C)No.18918/09 -9- and service charges of quarters, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the same can be recovered from the DCRG payable and from other pensionary benefits. 16. In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition is allowed. The fixation of liability as against the petitioner for recovering the amount spent for the Valuation Camps cannot be supported and it is declared so. The petitioner will be issued a revised proceedings showing the liability towards other items as mentioned above and the gratuity and other benefits will be disbursed and after effecting the recovery, the balance amount, if any, will be paid to the petitioner. Action in this regard will be completed within a period of three months. No costs. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. dsn