IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 7TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 16TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 17229 of 2004(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- VISWANATHAN K., S/O. KANNAN, KUNNATH HOUSE, CHALLIPARAMBA, PARUVASSERY P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.P.M.RAFIQ RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. KERALA STATE REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD. 3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), ALATHUR. 4. THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATHS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATS, KANNUR. 6. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATS, PALAKKAD. GOVERNMENT PLEADER , SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL FOR R1-R6 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.17229/2004 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE NO. B7 38254/2003 DT.24.9.2003 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT.28.10.2003 PREFERRED BY THE PETITONER BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.17229 OF 2004 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of November, 2008 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ The petitioner retired from service on 31.3.1992 as the Executive Officer of Kottopadam Grama Panchayat. While in service, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him and two increments were barred as per the order of the Deputy Director of Panchayat, Malappuram dated 2.7.1982. The petitioner submits now after 12 years of retirement to realise Rs.20,700/-, which is equivalent to six increments, steps are being taken. Ext.P1 is the demand notice issued to him under the Revenue Recovery Act, calling upon him to pay the said amount. Ext.P2 is the representation filed by him before the District Collector pointing out the injustice in recovering the amount as per Ext.P1. Thereafter, this writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P1. According to him the provisions of Kerala Civil Services (CC&A) Rules do not permit recovery of 8 increments. The maximum penalty that can be imposed is only bar of three increments, it is submitted. W.P.(C) No.17229/2004 2 2. The respondents 1 and 4 have filed a counter affidavit on 14.6.2007. As per the counter affidavit, the amount sought to be recovered is the unsuffered value of his annual increments barred, as a punishment for grave irregularities committed by him. It is also submitted that the orders barring the increments were issued as early as in 1979. But, because of the pendency of the disciplinary proceedings against him, the recovery was not made. 3. The petitioner has not chosen to produce the order in the disciplinary proceedings against him, based on which recovery is made. In the absence of challenge against that order, the challenge to notices under Revenue Recovery Act is unsustainable. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. (K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE) ps