IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH OCTOBER 2008 / 7TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 14756 of 2004(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ 1. P. UNNIKRISHNA MENON, MANAGER, A.L.P. SCHOOL, VENNUR, THALAPPILLY TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.(DIED) *2. K.K.SOMANATHAN, S/O LATE P.UNNIKRISHNA MENON, RESIDING AT AMRITHAM, KARTHYAYINI TEMPLE ROAD, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR 680 003. (2ND PETITIONER IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER IN IA NO.13312/05 DATED 29/10/2005) BY ADV. SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH (SR.) SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON SMT.M.R.VALSA SRI.SREEKANTH.K.R SMT.G.GEETHISHA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GENERAL EDUCATION (B) DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, WADAKKANCHERRY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. THE DEPUTY TAHASILDAR (R.R.), TALUK OFFICE, OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 4. U. VILASINI, RESIDING AT URAMBATH HOUSE, KALAPARA, P.O. KALIYARODE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.K.T.SHYAMKUMAR FOR R4 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.A.J.VARGHESE FOR R1 TO 3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ============== W.P.(C) NO. 14756 OF 2004 (F) ==================== Dated this the 29th day of October, 2008 J U D G M E N T The writ petition was filed challenging Ext.P4 revenue recovery notice initiated against the deceased petitioner for realising the salary paid to the 4th respondent for the period when she was kept out of service. It is now informed by the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners that the 1st petitioner expired on 21/5/2005 and that following his death, Additional Director of Public Instruction has passed Ext.P5 order, ordering transfer of the managership in favour of the wife of the deceased. 2. In this writ petition the challenge is only against Ext.P4 revenue recovery notice. In view of the expiry of the first petitioner, necessarily, the notice cannot be proceeded with and therefore for that reason, Ext.P4 is now quashed. However, this judgment will not stand in the way of the respondents enforcing recovery in accordance with law. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp