IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 5TH JANUARY 2009 / 15TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 37219 of 2008(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- S.PREASANNAKUMARI, W/O. DHANANJAYAN NAIR COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER COMMERCIAL TAXES, ATTINGAL RESIDING AT NALUKETTU, OPP.ENGINEERING COLLEGE, SREEKARYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.T.SHYAMKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES, HEAD OFFICE, THRISSUR REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. THE MANAGER, THE KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES, CHALAI BRANCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. MRS.KUSALAKUMARI, MANAGER,KSFE, MEDICAL COLLEGE BRANCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695011. 4. THE LIK AYUKTA CONSTITUTED UNDER THE KERALA LOK AYUKTA ACT,1999 HAVING ITS OFFICE AT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.M.L.SAJEEVAN, SC, KSFE LTD. FOR R1-2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC,J. ----------------------- W.P.(C).No. 37219/2008 ------------------------ Dated this the 5th day of January, 2009. JUDGMENT Petitioner is working as a Commercial Tax Officer. According to the petitioner, she has given her salary certificate in order to enable one Abubacker to avail of chitty loan from the Kerala State Financial Enterprises. Petitioner submits that misusing this salary certificate, she had been shown as surety in four transactions between the four subscribers and the KSFE. According to the petitioner, the same has been done only with the connivance of the 3rd respondent. 2. Petitioner states that she came to know of this, only when the recovery proceedings were initiated by issuing Ext.P2. It is stated that there upon the petitioner has moved the 4th respondent by filing Ext.P3 complaint along with Ext.P4 stay petition. Her grievance is that orders have not WP(c).No.37219/08 2 been passed on Ext.P4 and that in the meanwhile recovery pursuant to Ext.P2 is being continued. 3. Although the petitioner is seeking a direction to the Lok Ayukta to consider Ext.P4 application to keep in abeyance further proceedings for recovery pursuant to Ext.P2, I do not think that the petitioner is justified in her prayer for keeping in abeyance Ext.P2. This is for the reason that, even according to the petitioner, she has agreed to be a surety in NCL 170/08, for which according to her Ext.P1 confirmation of her salary certificate has been given. Therefore the respondents are, at any rate, entitled to recover from her salary, to liquidate the liability incurred towards NCL 170/88. In the aforesaid circumstances, particularly taking into account the complaint of the petitioner that she has not given her salary certificate for incurring liability in the remaining 3 transactions, I direct that, for a period of 2 months, the amount recovered pursuant to Ext.P2 will be appropriated towards the petitioner's liability in NCL 170/08. In the WP(c).No.37219/08 3 meanwhile, it will be open to the petitioner to move the 4th respondent and obtain appropriate interlocutory orders safeguarding her interest. It is clarified that, if the petitioner does not obtain any interlocutory orders, it will be open to the first respondent to recover the amount, as is being done now. Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WP(c).No.37219/08 4