IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 17TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 4465 of 2008(F) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ P.ASOK KUMAR, RANI BHAVAN PANNIKKONAM, PANACODE P.O., NEDUMANGADU THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. KERALA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIAL BOARD, VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. DIRECTOR KERALA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIAL BOARD VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. PROJECT OFFICER KERALA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIAL BOARD VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SRI.K.P.HARISH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/02/2008, ALONG WITH W.P.(C).20632/2005, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C)s.4465/2008 & 20632/2005 -------------------- Dated this the 6th day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT In view of the reliefs prayed for in writ petition No.4465/2008, it is necessary to consider only the said writ petition, as a direction therein will suffice for the purpose of the earlier writ petition as well. 2. Petitioner was the Manager of Khadi Soubhagya Bhavan, Panacode, Aryanadu, since 1994. Apparently, there was an agreement between the parties contemplating supply of Khadi products to the petitioner's godown. Sale proceedings will have to be remitted in the account of the Board. It seems that there was deficit payment by the petitioner for the year 2001-02 and 2002-03. Writ petition No.20632/2005 was filed at a point of time when recovery steps were initiated for recovery of amounts allegedly due from the petitioner in relation to the first two years. Petitioner contends in the said writ petition that he did not get an opportunity to submit an objection to the audit report and consequently W.P.(C)s.4465/2008 & 20632/2005 2 there was unilateral determination of amounts by the Khadi Board. Subsequently copies of the audit reports of the three years, 2000-01, 2001-02 and 2002-03 has been supplied to the petitioner and he has filed Ext.P13 objection in Writ Petition No.4465/2008. Petitioner prays that the objection may be considered and verification of the account may be done with notice to the petitioner. 3. I heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the Khadi and Village Industries Board. 4. In my view, it is necessary that the objection filed by the petitioner as Ext.P13 in Writ Petition No.4465/2008 should be considered with notice to the petitioner before final determination of the amount due from the Petitioner to the Board. Exts.P8 to P10 may also be considered as objections by the petitioners to the concerned audit report. W.P.(C)s.4465/2008 & 20632/2005 3 5. In the result, writ petitions are disposed of directing the first respondent to consider Exts.P8 to P10 and P13 objections in Writ Petition No.4465/2008 before final determination of the amount due from the petitioner for the relevant years. Verification should be done with notice to the petitioner and proceedings may be issued by the first respondent clearly indicating the amounts actually due from the petitioner in the aforementioned manner. Proceedings for recovery of the amounts due from the Petitioner shall be taken on the basis of the proceedings to be so drawn. Entire process may be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs