IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 20TH JUNE 2008 / 30TH JYAISHTA 1930 WA.No. 984 of 2008() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.11498/2008 Dated 25/04/2008 .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER IN WP(C): ----------------------------------------------------- K.R.LEELA BHAI, W/O.E.CHANDRASEKHARA PILLAI, HEADMISTRESS (RETD.FROM EVHSS NEDUVATHOOR) NEELASWARAM PO, KOTTARAKKARA. RESIDING AT:PLAVILA VEEDU, KIZHAKKEKARA, KOTTARAKKARA. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS IN WP(C): --------------------------------------------------------------- 1. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KOTTARAKKARA. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (EDUCATION). KOLLAM. 3. KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., KOLLAM BRANCH, KOLLAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. 4. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (KERALA ), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. Kss ..2/- ...2..... W.A.NO.984/2008 6. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADDL.7TH RESPONDENT: 7. C.MAYA, W/O.ANILKUMAR, EASWARAVILASOM HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, NEDUVATHOOR, KOTTARAKKARA, RESIDING AT:'GAYATHRI' EZHUKONE PO, EZHUKON, KOTTARAKKARA. ADDL. 8TH RESPONDENT. 8.HARIKUMAR.M.S., S/O.SREEDHARAN HSA, EASWARAVILASOM HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, NEDUVATHOOR, KOTTARAKKARA RESIDING AT: SREEBHAVAN KOTHATHALA, KOTTARAKKARA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K.SANDESH RAJA BY ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN,SC,K.S.CO-OP BANK - R3 SRI.ALEXANDER GEORGE – R7 & R8 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/06/2008 ALONG WITH WPC NO. 11498 OF 2008 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss J.B.KOSHY & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. -------------------------------------- W.A.Nos.984 of 2008 & W.P.(C)No.11498 OF 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated 20th June, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy,J . Appellant/writ petitioner in these cases was compulsorily retired from service as Headmistress with effect from 30.6.2007. On the basis of certain discrepancies in the audit of accounts regarding noon- feeding of the students, disciplinary action was taken against her which finally resulted in compulsory retirement. There is no dispute that she is entitled to DCRG, commuted value of pension and monthly pension after deducting the dues at the time of retirement. She had about 29 years of service. The liability fixed as per order dated 18.2.98 is only Rs.1,44,238/= it is stated that the amount is payable mainly because of absence of proper vouchers and according to the petitioner, that amount will be substantially reduced after verification of vouchers. Whatever that may be, according to her, DCRG itself is Rs.3,95,582/= and commuted value of pension is Rs.4,48,944/= and monthly pension after commutation will be Rs.8,190/= including DA and one year's pension is already in arrears. It is also stated that as per Ext.P1, bill was already prepared as pay revision arrears amounting to Rs.1,31,350/=. It is true that petitioner has taken loan from the third respondent bank. According W.A.984 & W.P.(C)11498 of 2008 2 to the bank, balance due is Rs.1,63,831/= as on 31.5.2008. Contention of the petitioner is that whatever amount due to the bank may be taken from DCRG due to her and even if the amount due to the Government as alleged is adjusted, there will be lakhs of rupees payable to her. In any event, DCRG and commuted value of pension will be sufficient to meet the liabilities as well as dues to the bank. In the above circumstances, the amount of pay revision arrears as per Ext.P1 should be released to the petitioner forthwith as it is submitted that her husband is under treatment and money is required. It should be paid within one month from today positively. Liability also should be fixed by the Government within three years of the retirement as required under the rules and balance amount should be paid to her after settling the liability and dues to the bank. This judgment will not prevent the petitioner from challenging the liability fixed by the Government as well as the Bank in appropriate proceedings. Both writ appeal and writ petition are disposed of accordingly. J.B.KOSHY JUDGE P.N.RAVINDRAN JUDGE tks