IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD PRESENT : : HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.DURGA PRASAD W.A.No.765 OF 2003 Date:18.04.2011 Between:- The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Head Post office, Vijayawada and another .. Petitioners. A N D Gutti Sudhakar .. Respondent. The Court made the following: JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Goda Raghuram) This appeal is fundamentally misconceived. Neither is the grievance discernable nor the appeal grounds clear. The appeal is by the respondents in the writ petition No.13860 of 2002 which was filed by the respondent herein seeking invalidation of the order dated 17.06.2002 of the 1st appellant and for a declaration that the writ petitioner is the legal heir of the deceased Gururajachar; entitled to the sum due under Kisan Vikas Patras of Sri Gururajachar; and for a direction to the appellants herein to pay the amount due under the said certificates. According to the Writ Petitioner Gururajachar was his paternal uncle, who died on 01.11.1994; the petitioner’s father having pre- deceased the said individual. The petitioner claims to have succeeded to the estate of Gururajachar, who retired as a Postmaster in Vijayawada. At the time of Gururajachar’s death, since none attended, police registered a case in Crime No.351 of 1994 (presumably under Section 174 Cr.P.C.) and performed his funeral and seized the documents and articles belonging to the deceased. The petitioner filed W.P.No.20124 of 1998 seeking custody of the documents seized by the police. The said writ petition was disposed of directing the police to produce all the details of the documents seized in connection with Crime No.351 of 1994. Eventually, the petitioner learnt that the seized articles of the estate would be delivered only after obtaining a succession certificate. The petitioner filed O.P.No.425 of 1999 before the II Additional District Judge, Vijayawada, who issued a succession certificate in favour of the petitioner certifying him to be the successor and entitled to succeed to the estate of Gururajachar including the amounts due under the Kisan Vikas Patras. The petitioner thereafter approached the 1st appellant herein for payment of the amount due under Kisan Vikas Patras. This was rejected by an Order dated 17.06.2002 by the 1st appellant and assailing the same, a writ petition was filed by the respondent herein. Relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported i n “VISHIN N.KHANCHANDANIDANI v. VIDYA LACHMANDAS KHANCHANDANI”[1], the learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition setting aside the 1st appellant’s Order, dated 17.06.2002, denying the right of the petitioner to the estate of Gururajachar i.e. amount due under Kisan Vikas Patras and directed the appellants to enquire about the persons entitled to receive the amount due under the Kisan Vikas Patras including the nominees and the persons in whose favour the succession certificate is granted, in the light of the law declared by the Apex Court in Vishin N.Khanchandanidani’s case (referred supra) and to pay the necessary amounts to the persons entitled according to law and directed that the entire exercise be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of that Order. It is clear that this Court did not either declare the writ petitioner exclusively or otherwise to be entitled to receive the amount due under the Kisan Vikas Patras nor that the nominee is so entitled or otherwise. The entitlement was directed to be determined by the appellants after an enquiry in the matter. Learned counsel for the appellants would strenuously contend that under the provisions of Section 6 of the Government Savings Certificates Act (46 of 1959), the amounts due shall have to be paid to the nominee and such payment would liberate the Postal Department from liability. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vishin N.Khanchandanidani’s case (referred supra) has reiterated the position following from the provisions of Act 46 of 1959, but observed that notwithstanding the immunity from liability conferred, in respect of payments made in favour of a nominee, the appropriate legal representatives under the appropriate law of succession would be entitled to recover the amounts due from the estate of the deceased in the hands of the nominees. In view of the fact that the writ petition was disposed of by directing the appellants herein to conduct an enquiry and pass an order, we fail to comprehend the grievance of the appellants. On the above premise, the appeal is misconceived and is accordingly dismissed. Since nearly a decade has passed from the date of the judgment and the amount due under the Kisan Vikas Patras is lying with the appellants on account of the suspension of the Order of learned Single Judge obtained in this appeal, we direct the appellants, in particular the 1st appellant, to conclude the enquiry and pass an Order within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. The Order so passed, shall be communicated to the respondent herein within a period of two weeks from the date of the Order without demur, fail or procrastination. There shall be no Order as to costs. _____________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J _____________________ P.DURGA PRASAD,J 18th April, 2011 KSP/PVKS [1] AIR 2000 Supreme Court 2747