IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 27TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 4861 of 2010(G) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SADANANDAN D., (RETD. CHIEF MANAGER, KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD.), GARDEN RESORT, K.P.3/29 D, VAZHAYILA, KARAKULAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 564. BY ADVS. SMT.SREEDEVI KYLASANATH SRI.V.SADASIVAN SMT.V.J.SAFEENA SMT.SHALEENA RAJAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN, KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD., HEAD OFFICE, THRISSUR-680 020. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD., HEAD OFFICE, THRISSUR-680 020. 3. THE GENERAL MANAGER (BUSINESS), KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD., HEAD OFFICE, THRISSUR-680 020. BY ADV. SRI. M.L. SAJEEVAN - SC FOR R1 TO R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO. 4861 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of February, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a retiree from the Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd. On 31.5.2009, he retired from its service on superannuation while holding the post of Chief Manager. Prior to his retirement, he was issued with Ext.P1 memo of charges. The petitioner submitted Ext.P2 reply to Ext.P1 before the third respondent. The contention of the petitioner is that without following the established procedures and in violation of the principles of natural justice, it was ordered to recover an amount of Rs.2,32,665/- from the retiral benefits due to the petitioner as per Ext.P3 communication. Feeling aggrieved by Ext.P3, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P5 appeal before the second respondent. However, no action has so far been taken on Ext.P5 appeal. It was in the circumstances that this Writ Petition has been filed. 2. It is evident from Ext.P5 appeal that the petitioner has raised several contentions against Ext.P3 including the one to the effect that it was issued without following the prescribed procedures and in violation of W.P.(C) NO.4861 of 2010 2 the principles of natural justice. It is the settled position that any order having civil consequences can be passed only after following the prescribed procedures and the principles of natural justice. Since Ext.P5 appeal has been preferred by the petitioner and it is pending before the second respondent, it is up to the appellate authority, who is the second respondent, to consider all these aspects. In view of the contention that an amount of Rs.2,32,665/- has been ordered to be recovered from the retiral benefits due to the petitioner even without following the prescribed procedures and even without notice to the petitioner, it is only appropriate that such recovery shall be deferred till a decision is taken on Ext.P5. As Ext.P5 has been filed as early as on 9.9.2009, there shall be a direction to the second respondent to consider and pass orders thereon expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) NO.4861 of 2010 3 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. W.P.(C). NO. 4861/2010 JUDGMENT 16th February, 2010