IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 18TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 23101 of 2009(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.PRAKASH, GEETHA BHAVAN, MOUNT P.O., VANDIPERIYAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.BOSE SRI.VINOD MADHAVAN SMT.NISHA BOSE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, PEERMADE. 3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR) PEERMADE. 4. THE SECRETARY, KOKKAYAR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, KUTTIPLANGADE P.O.-686514, IDUKKI DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU FOR R-4 SRI.A.HAROON RASHEED FOR R-4 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J. --------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 23101 OF 2009 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of September, 2009 J U D G M E N T 1. The petitioner is the retired secretary of 4th respondent/Grama panchayat. He is aggrieved by Ext.P7 to P9 notices issued for realisation of amounts alleged to have been fixed as his personal liability. The liability was fixed upon the petitioner based on Ext.R4(a) report of the Local Fund Audit authorities, pursuant to issuance of Ext.R4(b) show cause notice. The basis of the allegation is that, the petitioner had failed to collect the entire amount of licence fee for the whole year due from a contractor in favour of whom licence for collection of sand was confirmed. But it is evident that inspite of payment of two instalments of the licence fee, the contractor could not collect any sand due to order of injunction obtained by some third person, and the panchayat ultimately took a resolution as evidenced by Ext.P4 to the effect of refunding the instalments already paid by the contractor. However it is pointed out that, in a Writ Petition filed by the contractor, the Panchayat undertook to make refund of the amount already paid. 2. In view of the above situation, the liability fixed on the WPC NO.23101/2009 2 petitioner is not sustainable. Consequently recovery steps initiated for realisation of the amount is unsustainable. Under the above circumstance, the Writ Petition is allowed quashing Ext.P7 to P9 and all steps of recovery initiated pursuant to the said notices. C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE dnc