IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 4TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 20522 of 2004(R) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ D.LIM, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE (RTD.), PUSHPA DALE, PATTATHANAM, KOLLAM 691 001. BY ADV. SRI.B.RAGUNATHAN SRI.V.V.MATHEW SRI.G.GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001. 2. DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 033. 3. PRINCIPAL AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KOLLAM 691 013. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.NANDAKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.20522/04 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF DO LETTER NO.AD(1) 11228/96 DT 10.12.98 ALONG WITH THE PROVISIONAL LC ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.AUDIT 1(2)/63439/95 DT 23.1.99 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.AUD1(2) 61606/93 DT 30.499 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.AUD1(2)63438/95 DT 14.1.00 ALONG WITH THE LC ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.A(1) 14911/96 DT 7.1.98 OF THE PRINCIPAL AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KOZHIKODE. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.PR1/PEN.A/1064/AA/97-98/385 DT 2.2.1998 OF THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL(A&E), KERALA. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF GRATUITY PAYMENT ORDER NO.PA7/Q1.N/36177/E/2923 DT 17.3.1998 OF THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A&E), KERALA. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 20522 OF 2004 (R) ===================== Dated this the 25th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner retired as Deputy Director of Agriculture on 30/11/96. His grievance is against Ext.P4, the liability certificate issued on 14/1/2000 indicating a liability of Rs.55,870, out of which petitioner submits that he has already remitted Rs.1,266/-. 2. Although several contentions are raised against the invalidity of Ext.P4, having regard to the fact that the liability mentioned therein has been fixed only on 14/1/2000, this is beyond the three year period specified in Note 2 to Rule 3 of Part III K.S.R and on that ground, the liability as fixed in Ext.P4 cannot be enforced against the petitioner. 3. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release the balance amount of DCRG that is due to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 6 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. However, this shall be without prejudice to the right of the respondents to seek appropriate action for recovery of the amount. Though the counsel for the petitioner has pressed for WPC 20522/04 :2 : interest, having regard to the fact that the writ petition is disposed of on technical grounds, I am not inclined to allow the same. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp