IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 12TH AUGUST 2011 / 21ST SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 15249 of 2005(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- A.C.CYRIAC, AAKKAL HOUSE, MANJOOR KOTTAYAM 686 603. BY ADV. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE SRI.GEORGE MATHEWS SMT.CELINE JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DIRECTOR, HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE MANAGER, CORPORATE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY OF SCHOOLS, DIOCES OF KOTTAYAM THE CATHOLIC BISHOPS HOUSE, KOTTAYAM-1. 4. C.M.LUKOSE, CHAMAKKALAYIL HOUSE, KAIPUZHA P.O., KOTTAYAM. 5. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KOTTAYAM. 6. THE DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER OF SCHEDULED CASTES, COLLECTORATE, KOTTAYAM. 7. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, TRIVANDRUM. ADDITIONAL RESPONDENT: 8. THE PRINCIPAL, ST. MICHALE HIGH SCHOOL, KADUTHURUTHY, KOTTYAM DISTRICT, (R8 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER IN I.A.NO.2745/10 DTD.16.3.10.) ADV. SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN FOR R4 SRI.ARUN MOHAN FOR R4 GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1,2,5,6,7 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12.8.11, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No. 15249/05. APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS P1. COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD.14.8.O1. P2. COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD.22.1.02. P3. COPY OF THE REPLY DTD.14.8.01. P4. COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.7.9.01. P5. COPY OF THE LETTER DTE.20.4.02. P6. COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.18.9.02. P7. -DO- 30.9.02. P8. COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD.28.10.02 BEFORE THE D.D. P9. COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD.2.11.02. P10. COPY OF THE MEMO DTD.21.10.02. P11. COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.13.12.02. P12. COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.2.1.03. P13. COPY OF THE MEMO DTD.6.1.03. P14. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.8.10.04. P15. COPY OF THE REPLY DTD.17.11.04. P16. COPY OF THE AUDIT REPORT FROM 1.6.98 TO 30.4.01. P17. COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.2.9.03. P18. COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.2.9.03. P19. COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.28.4.04. P20. COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.17.8.02. P21. COPY OF THE DECLARATIONS OF THE STUDENTS. P22. COPY OF THE LETTER BY THE SUCCESSOR. sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 15249 of 2005 ================== Dated this the 12th day of August, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner retired as the principal of an aided school on 31.3.2003. His DCRG has not been disbursed and non-liability certificate has not been issued. According to the petitioner, no liability has been fixed on the petitioner after notice to the petitioner at any time. Now three years prescribed in Note 3 to Rule 3 of Part III of KSR is long over. Therefore, no liability can also be fixed at this point of time. It is under the above circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs; “i) to call for the records leading to Ext.P14 and quash the same by the issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other writ, direction or order; ii) to grant a declaration that the petitioner is not liable for the non-production of cash book and acquittance register relating to the disbursement of lump sum grant for the year 2001-2002:” 2. A counter affidavit has been filed, wherein it is stated that the petitioner is liable for an amount of ` 1,69,222/-, which is the loss caused to the Government on account of the misconduct of the 4th respondent, who was a clerk of the school. According to respondents 1, 2 and 5, as the principal of the school, who is the controlling authority of the 4th respondent, the petitioner is also equally liable for the loss caused by the 4th respondent. Therefore, that amount is liable to be adjusted against the DCRG due to the petitioner is the contention w.p.c.15249/05 2 raised. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 4. Nowhere in the counter affidavit is it stated that any liability has been fixed on the petitioner with notice to the petitioner as required under Note 3 to Rule 3 of Part III of KSR. Under the said rule, liability, if any, has to be fixed within three years of the retirement. Now it is more than eight years. No liability can now be fixed also. In the above circumstances, I am of opinion that respondents 1, 2 and 5 cannot recover any amount from the DCRG due to the petitioner. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents 1, 2 and 5 to disburse the DCRG due to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge