IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2009 / 19TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 16353 of 2007(V) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. P. ALI, AGED 63 YEARS, THANDIAKADA HOUSE, ELOOR NORTH, UDYOGAMANDAL P.O. 2. HAWAMMA T.H., W/O P. ALI, AGED 59 YEARS, OF DO. DO. BY ADV. MR.LIFFY P. FRANCIS RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE POST MASTER GENERAL, KOCHI. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT, HEAD POST OFFICE, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE POST MASTER, UDYOGAMANDAL,ELOOR. 4. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICE, N.PARAVUR. R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.N. SUDHA DEVI. R1 TO R3 BY ADV. MR.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SG. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 16353/2007-V APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE NATIONAL SAVING CERTIFICATE OF 1ST PETITIONER. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE NATIONAL SAVING CERTIFICATE OF 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE NATIONAL SAVING CERTIFICATE OF 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE LETTER 3RD RESPONDENT ISSUED TO 1ST PETITIONER DATED 17/05/2007. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE LETTER OF 3RD RESPONDENT TO 2ND PETITIONER DATED 17/05/2007. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION OF 1ST PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 19/05/2007. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION OF 2ND PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 19/05/2007. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 16353 of 2007 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 9th June, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioners are man and wife. They joined the 6 years' National Saving Certificate Scheme on 23-3-2000 and 24-11-2000 depositing Rs. 10,000/- and Rs. 2,000/- respectively as per Exts.P1, P2 and P3. The petitioners' grievance is that although the certificates have matured, the maturity value is not being paid to the petitioners. The petitioners therefore seek the following reliefs: “(i) Issue a writ of mandamus directing 3rd respondent to release the amount due to the petitioners vide Exts.P1, P2 and P3 National Saving Certificates; (ii) issue a writ of mandamus directing 3rd respondent to pay compensation to the petitioners to the tune of Rs. 5000/- each for the mental agony hardship, humiliation and harassment faced by them even in their old age from the 3rd respondent.” 2. The writ petition was admitted on 30-5-2007. Respondents 1 to 4 entered appearance and service was complete. When the matter came up on 29-6-2007, I passed the following order: “Post after two weeks. In the meantime, the Assistant Solicitor General shall positively get instructions as to why the amounts covered by the NSC of the petitioners should not be directed to be disbursed to them.” Again, the matter came up on 27-7-2009 on which date, I passed the following order: “By order dated 29.6.07, I had specifically directed that the Assistant Solicitor General shall positively get instruction as to why the amounts covered by National Savings Certificate of the petitioners should not be directed to be disbursed to them. The same again came up on 20-7-2007. It was again adjourned at the request of the Asst. Solicitor General to today. When the case was called today, the W.P.C. No. 16353/07 -: 2 :- Asst. Solicitor General was absent. In the above circumstances, I am constrained to accept the statements in the writ petition as prima facie true. Accordingly, there would be an interim direction to the 1st respondent to disburse the amounts covered by Exts. P1 to P3 to the petitioners within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” Now, the writ petition is coming up for final hearing. Even after almost two years, no counter affidavit is filed. Today, when the matter was taken up, the Assistant Solicitor General argued that it was because the petitioners have created a charge over the certificates in favour of Commercial Tax Officer, the amount could not be paid. But the petitioners categorically avers that on 15-5-2007, the 4th respondent released the certificates from the charges. In fact, they have produced Exts.P4 and P5 letters, whereby the 4th respondent has released the certificates for payment to the petitioners. That being so, there is no reason for respondents 1 to 3 to withhold payment of the maturity value of the certificates to the petitioners. In the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of the interim order dated 27-7-2007, extracted above. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/