IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 21ST JULY 2008 / 30TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 21942 of 2007(K) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------------- V.A.ALICE, VATTUKULATHIL HOUSE, NEENDOOR P.O., KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. THE ACCOUNTS OFFICER, KERALA PANCHAYAT EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYAT (ANNEXE), CORPORATION BUILDING, OPPOSITE SMV SCHOOL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYAT, KOTTAYAM. 3. THE DISTRICT TREASURY OFFICER, KOTTAYAM. 4. THE SECRETARY, ETTUMANOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, P.O.KOTTAYAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. M.R. SREELATHA BY ADV. SRI.K.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP FOR R.3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P(C) NO. 21942 OF 2007 ---------------------------------------- APPENDIX --------------- PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: ---------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.A2-9368/06 DATED 3.1.2007 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.PF-3-128/07 DATED 22.1.2007 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.PF-3-128/07 DATED 27.1.2007 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF LAWYER'S NOTICE ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 16.5.207. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF REPLY ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED 30.5.2007. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT R4(a) TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER, DATED 4.10.2006. EXHIBIT R4(b) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 25.10.2007 ISSUED BY THE ACCOUNTS OFFICER, K.P.E.P.F. V. GIRI, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P(C) NO.21942 OF 2007 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 21st day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T -------------------- The petitioner retired from service on 30.11.2006 from Ettumanoor Grama Panchayat. She became a member of the Kerala Panchayat Employees Provident Fund in July, 1991. The petitioner contends that even as per the accounts furnished by respondents 1 to 3 an amount of Rs.1,55,230/- was remitted in the Provident Fund account of the petitioner. She claimed that she is entitled to the said amount. By Exhibit P1 letter dated 3.1.2007 she was informed from the office of the Deputy Director of Panchayats that out of the amount of Rs.1,55,230/-, an amount of Rs.90,555/- had been availed by the petitioner as a loan and that an amount of Rs.64,675/- is lying in the said account to the credit of the petitioner. The case of the petitioner is that loans were, no doubt, availed by her from the Provident Fund account and those amounts were repaid. But the repayment was, apparently, not correctly acknowledged in the petitioner's account. W.P(C) NO. 21942 OF 2007 -: 2 :- 2. An interim order was passed by this court requiring the petitioner to file an additional affidavit incorporating necessary details as to the amounts which she had received and which she claims to be due to her by way of balance. The relevant portion reads as follows: “Total amount remitted by me to the Fund as stated in Exhibit P1 order Rs.1,55,230.00 Amount disbursed to me as per Exhibit P3 order Rs.34,043.00 Amount disbursed to me as per Order dated 25.10.2007 by Accounts Officer Rs.65,763.00 Total amount disbursed to me Rs.99,806.00 Balance amount due to me Rs.55,424.00 =========” 3. In the counter affidavit filed by the 4th respondent it was contended that an amount Rs.64,675/- was lying in the Provident Fund account to the credit of the petitioner at the time of her retirement. An amount of Rs.34,043/- was sanctioned and disbursed to the petitioner. A further amount W.P(C) NO. 21942 OF 2007 -: 3 :- of Rs.65,763/- had already been paid to the petitioner. Receipt of both these payments are acknowledged by the petitioner in the additional affidavit filed by the petitioner on 6.2.2008, referred to above. 4. I do not find any statement or counter affidavit by the first respondent. The petitioner is obviously entitled to the entire amount due to her which was lying in the Provident Fund account to her credit at the time of her retirement. The question as to whether she had repaid the loan that was availed by her from the Provident Fund account is a matter of verification by the first respondent. In the result, the Writ Petitioner is disposed of directing the first respondent to verify whether the amounts availed by the petitioner from her Provident Fund account were repaid by her and if it had been so repaid, the balance amount due to the petitioner as indicated in her additional affidavit filed on 6.2.2008 shall be disbursed to her within six weeks from date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. V. GIRI, JUDGE. vsv