IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 27TH JUNE 2008 / 6TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 7076 of 2008(P) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------------- C.RICHARD, S/O.CHELLAYYAM, AGED 70 YEARS, RETIRED SECRETARY, KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RESIDING AT KEERTHI BHAVAN, KUVALASSERY P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.PAVITHRAN SRI.M.X.XAVIER SRI.K.BAIJU SMT.N.S.SUMI RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. DIRECTOR OF CIVIL SUPPLIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, NEYYATTINKARA TALUK. 3. VILLAGE OFFICER, MARANALLOOR VILLAGE, OORETTAMPALAM P.O., NEYYATTINKARA TALUK. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. T.B. REMANI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.7076/2008 P APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 30/07/2004. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE REPLY DTD. 31/12/2004. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 29/01/2008 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 29/01/2008 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss V.GIRI, J ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). 7076 of 2008 P ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner retried from service on 30.4.1992 as the Secretary of Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thiruvananthapuram. He was issued Ext.P1 notice, on 30.7.2004 stating that he has caused a loss to the tune of Rs.9,229/- when he was working as the Taluk Supply Officer, Thalappilly. Apparently, petitioner was the Taluk Supply Officer, Thalappilly only for a period of 5 months from 2.8.1986 to 3.1.1987. Petitioner gave a reply to Ext.P1 vide Ext.P2. He did not thereafter, receive any communication, but was served with Ext.P3 recovery notice requiring to remit an amount of Rs.9,229/- with collection charges. This has been challenged in the writ petition. 2. Ext.P1 notice seeking to recover a loss from the Government servant is issued about 12 years after retirement. Government is entitled to recover the loss that has been caused to it from a Government servant in terms of Ruling 6 to Rule 116(5) of Part-III of Kerala Service Rules. W.P.(C) No.7076/08 :: 2 :: Going by the said Ruling, Government has to approach the Civil Court as such. In these circumstances Ext.P1 can only be treated as the Government’s own determination that there is a loss. But for actual recovery, there has to be an adjudication by the competent authority. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of holding that if the Government proposes to recover any loss from the petitioner, it shall be done only in terms of Ruling 6 to Rule 116(5) of Part-III of Kerala Service Rules. Obviously, the proceedings under the Revenue Recovery Act cannot be enforced, except in accordance with Ruling 6 of Rule 116(5) of Part-III of the Kerala Service Rules. Sd/- V.GIRI, Judge sk/- //true copy//