IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 25TH JUNE 2010 / 4TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 19826 of 2010(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- S.NANDAKUMAR, L.D.CLERK, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, VARKALA GROUP, RESIDING AT KALLUR MADAM, KEEZHATTINGAL P.O. ATTINGAL, TRIVANDRUM - 695 101. BY ADV. SRI.S.JAYAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NANTHANCODE, TRIVANDRUM - 695 001. 2. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, TRIVANDRUM - 695 001. 3. THE DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, -DO- -DO- 695 001. 4. THE ASSISTANT DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, VARKALA GROUP - 695 141. SRI.P.GOPAL, SC, TDB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 19826 OF 2010 (C) ===================== Dated this the 25th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T Heard the standing counsel for the respondents also. 2. Petitioner is a LD Clerk under the 4th respondent. In this writ petition, he is aggrieved by Exts.P2 and P6. According to the petitioner, while he was working as Sub Group Officer, Keezhattingal Sub Group, he was placed under suspension on the basis of an audit objection. It is stated that although he was exonerated by Ext.P4, the Commissioner passed Ext.P2 order directing recovery of excess amount drawn by him. In pursuance to Ext.P2 order of the Commissioner, the 4th respondent has issued Ext.P6 directing recovery of Rs.46,725.62. It is aggrieved by the aforesaid two orders, the writ petition is filed. 3. I heard the counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents. 4. As is evident from Ext.P2 itself, the Commissioner has directed recovery of the excess amounts allegedly drawn by the petitioner without putting the petitioner on notice or giving him an opportunity to file his objections in the matter. It is in pursuance to WPC No. 19826/10 :2 : Ext.P2 that the 4th respondent has issued Ext.P4. Since Ext.P2, the basic order, has been issued in violation of the principles of natural justice, the said order, and also Ext.P6, the consequential order, are vitiated. Therefore, the recovery proposed to be taken cannot be allowed. 5. In the circumstances, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions:- (1) That Ext.P2 proceedings of the 3rd respondent will be treated as a notice and it will be open to the petitioner to file objections in the matter within four weeks from today. (2) On receipt of the objections from the petitioner as above, the 3rd respondent shall issue notice to the petitioner, hear him and pass final orders in the matter. (3) It is directed that until orders are passed in the matter as above, further proceedings for recovery pursuant to Exts.P2 and P6 will be kept in abeyance. (4) Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition before the 3rd respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp