IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 15TH DECEMBER 2008 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 539 of 2008(L) ------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------- ERNAKULAM DISTRICT GOVERNMENT COLLEGE EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.E-844, MAHARAJA'S COLLEGE, COCHIN-11, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE PRINCIPAL, MAHARAJA'S COLLEGE, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE DISTRICT TREASURY OFFICER, ERNAKULAM. 4. K.J.MATHAI, KAKKOTTOLICKAL HOUSE, AYOORPADAM P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM. 5. K.M.ABDUL SALAM, KARADIPARAMBU HOUSE, ELOOR WEST, UDYOGAMANDAL, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.JOHN JOSEPH(ROY) FOR R4 SRI.JIJO ISAAC FOR R4 SHRI.K.C.SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.539 of 2008-L = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 15th day of December, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner is a co-operative society. It advanced certain amounts to the fifth respondent. He failed to repay. There were coercive steps for recovery from his salary. He retired on 31-12- 2006. The petitioner sent an intimation Ext.R2(a) dated 14-7-2006, to the Principal of the College where the fifth respondent was working stating that the fifth respondent owes the amounts shown therein to the petitioner. On record, there is nothing to tie down the fifth respondent or his paying officer to any agreement under Section 37 of the KCS Act. Ext.P1 loan bond contains only an authority to effect deduction from the salaries. As of now, the fifth respondent demitted office on the last working day of 2006. There can be no recovery from his DCRG invoking Section 37. Retiral benefits have been released to him acting WP(C)539/08 -: 2 :- on Ext.R2(b) which is an undertaking by the fifth respondent to the Government. That is only an undertaking to accept personal liabilities, subject to audit of accounts. That document clearly shows that it does not bind him to any acknowledgement of any liability or existence of transactions between the petitioner and the fifth respondent rather than further wait. The petitioner has to, if so advised, move for necessary action in terms of the KCS Act, including Section 69 thereof for recovery of the total outstandings. The writ petition fails in as much as it only seeks directions to the official respondents to consider certain representations and to conduct enquiry into the alleged fraud and also to effect certain recoveries from pensionary benefits. The same is accordingly dismissed without prejudice to arbitration as aforesaid. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/171208