IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 20TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 29TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 22758 of 2005(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ D. REMADEVI, W/O. B. GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI, DEVANKANAM, BALUSSERY P.O, KOZHIKODE, PIN-673 612. BY ADV. SRI.P.N.PURUSHOTHAMA KAIMAL RESPONDENT(S): ------------------ 1. THE DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES POOKODE LAKE, LAKKIDI P.O., WAYANAD. 3. THE ACCOUNT GENERAL OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.NANDAKUMAR FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.22758/05 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER'S HUSBAND DT 15.5.2004. EXT.P2: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DT 29.6.05. EXT.P3: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DT 27.2.2008. EXTS. OF R1 EXT.R1(a): TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF ASST.DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES, WAYANAD WITH NO.A/192/95 DT.29.6.05. EXT.R1(a): TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO OF CHARGES. EXT.R1(a1): TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS. EXT.R1(b): TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES, KOZHIKODE. EXT.R1(c): TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DT 11.12.2002. EXT.R1(d): TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DT 26.9.2003. EXT.R1(e): TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DT 22.10.2003. EXT.R1(f): TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT 28.11.2003. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 22758 OF 2005 (H) ===================== Dated this the 20th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner's husband was an Assistant Extension Officer under the Fisheries Department. He retired from service on 31/10/2003 and expired on 4/5/2004. This writ petition is filed praying for directing release of terminal benefits due to the petitioner's husband. 2. Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents. From the counter affidavit, it would appear that there are liabilities outstanding against the deceased husband of the petitioner. The first liability indicated is Rs.1,97,229/- fixed as the liability of the petitioner's husband by order dated 28/11/2003 issued by the Director of Fisheries. In that order, it is also held that he should pay 12% interest on the amount due from him. It is stated that accordingly a total amount of Rs.4,20,740/- is now due. 3. The nature of the charges (Ext.R1a), which led to the fixation of liability show that the allegation that the petitioner's husband did not produce the documents relating to the amounts WPC 22758/05 :2 : under the savings cum Relief Scheme and this does not appear to be a case when any amount was misappropriated. That apart, the employee having expired long ago, I do not think there is any justification for holding the family liable for interest. Therefore 12% interest that is sought to be levied on the petitioner on Rs.1,97,229/- is unjustifiable and will stand waived. It is stated that towards the aforesaid liability, Rs,9,953/- being the surrender of Earned Leave salary has already been adjusted and if so, credit should be given to such amount and it will be open to the respondents to adjust the balance amount of Rs.1,87,276/- that is due from the deceased. 4. The next liability of the petitioner's husband was for Rs.87,520/- towards liability due to the excess fixation, which was pointed out by the Accountant General. Towards this liability, an amount of Rs.51,179/- being the arrears payable to the deceased was already adjusted, and the balance outstanding is stated to be Rs.36,341/-. It cannot be said that the deceased was in any way responsible to the excess fixation or its payment and this excess fixation having been effected long ago, there is absolutely no WPC 22758/05 :3 : justification for recovering this amount from the terminal benefits. Therefore, the amount proposed to be recovered towards excess fixation is unjustifiable and cannot be ordered. In that view of the matter, the arrears of Rs.51,179/- adjusted towards excess fixation has to be refunded to the petitioner. 5. The third liability indicated is that of Rs.16,752/-, which is stated to have been received by the deceased towards subsistence allowance. There is no statutory provision enabling adjustment of subsistence allowance paid to a person placed under suspension. If that be so, the amount of Rs.16,752/- also cannot be a liability to be recovered. 6. It is also indicated that the Accountant General has instructed Sub Treasury Officer, Balussery that a sum of Rs.,2,75,136/- is to be recovered from the benefits due to the deceased. It is not indicated that this amount is towards any liability that was fixed against the deceased, and if so, the same also cannot be recovered from the terminal benefits. 7. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of declaring that it will be open to the respondent to recover Rs.1,87,276/- WPC 22758/05 :4 : from the terminal benefits that are due to the deceased and the balance amount will be paid to the petitioner. 8. It is also directed that the family pension admissible will also be paid to the petitioner. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the respondents for taking appropriate action. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp