IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2011 / 4TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 2833 of 2007(K) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- FRANCIS P.A. S/O.ANTONY, PONMANI HOUSE, VELUTHUR P.O. KUNTHANGADI, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SMT.K.S.CHANDRIKA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATHS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A&E),KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER: SRI. SANDESH RAJA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.C. NO. 2833 OF 2007 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF ORDER NO.P-01/PAN/A/42/AA/04-05/111 DATED 7.5.2004 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT P2: COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 19.12.2006 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P3: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES IN THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM WITH RESPECT TO THE LIABILITY OF RS.38,980/- DURING THE PERIOD OF LAST 3 YEARS HE WORKED IN AVANOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH AS ASSESSED BY DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH, THRISSUR. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL TRUE COPY SM P.A. TO JUDGE. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 2833 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 25th day of March, 2011 J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed by a retired Panchayat Secretary complaining that the DCRG due to the petitioner has not been disbursed to him. He seeks the following reliefs: “i) issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ, order or direction commanding respondents to disburse the DCRG amount as stated in Exhibit P1 to the petitioner within a time limit to be prescribed by this Hon'ble Court. ii) issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to grant interest at the rate of 18% on the amount of DCRG sanctioned as per Exhibit P1. iii) issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ, order or direction commanding the 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of Exhibit P2 within a time limit to be prescribed by this Hon'ble Court.” A counter affidavit has been filed by the 2nd respondent wherein it is stated that after deducting liability due from the petitioner the balance amount of DCRG has already been disbursed to the petitioner. In the reply affidavit the petitioner admits having received an amount of Rs.50,134/- W.P.(C)No. 2833 of 2007 -2- under pretest. In respect of the liability fixed, the petitioner submits that no liability is due to the petitioner. In the writ petition there is no challenge against the liability fixed as is clear from the prayers quoted above. Although the petitioner has disputed the liability in the reply affidavit without amending the writ petition and challenging the fixation of liability also, I do not think that, I can consider the challenge against the fixation of liability in this writ petition. Accordingly the writ petition is closed. Sd/- S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE //True copy// P.A. TO JUDGE shg/