IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2009 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 19585 of 2008(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- PURUSHOTHAMAN, KARTHIKA, EZHUPUNNA, ALLEPPEY DISTRICT, RETIRED AS SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT, ELECTRICAL SECTION, AROOR. BY ADV. SMT.P.K.RADHIKA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE CHAIRMAN, K.S.E.B., VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTAM PALACE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-4. 2. THE SECRETARY, BOARD SECRETARIAT, K.S.E.B., VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (HRM), K.S.E.B., VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM PALACE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-4. 4. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL CIRCLE, ALAPPUZHA. 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, CHERTHALA. *6. ARUN, S/O.LATE DAMODHARAN, PANDARAPATTATHIL HOUSE, KUTHIYATHODE, ALAPPUZHA DIST. *7. ANIMESH, S/O.LATE DAMODHARAN, PANDARAPATTATHIL HOUSE, KUTHIYATHODE, ALAPPUZHA DIST. WPC NO.19585/2008 *8. MANESH, S/O.LATE DAMODHARAN, PANDARAPATTATHIL HOUSE, KUTHIYATHODE, ALAPPUZHA DIST. *(IMPLEADED AS ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS 6 TO 8 IN THE WRIT PETITION AS PER ORDER DATED 28/10/2009 IN I.A.NO.1649/2009) ADV. SRI. ASOK M.CHERIYAN, SC, KSEB FOR R1 TO 5 SRI.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB FOR R1 TO 5 SRI.E.G.GORDEN FOR ADDL.R6-8 SRI.S.K.KRISHNAKUMAR FOR ADDL.R6-8 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.19585/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF MEMO OF CHARGES DATED 22/12/2004. P2 : COPY OF STATEMENT OF DEFENCE 31/5/05. P3 : COPY OF COMMUNICATION DATED 23/1/06. P4 : COPY OF ARGUMENT NOTE SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE ENQUIRY OFFICER. P5 : COPY OF SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 2/4/07. P6 : COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 03/5/07. P7 : COPY OF ORDER NO.EB3/DIS.ACTION/KTD/05-06/1806/ 31/05/2008. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS R6(a) : COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.2536/09 DATED 16/6/09 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA. R6(b) : COPY OF STATEMENT DATED 18/9/2009 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT KSEB. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.19585 of 2008 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 28th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner was an employee of the Kerala State Electricity Board. While he was working as a Senior Assistant at Electrical Major Section, Kuthiyathode, there was an allegation that he along with two others were involved in under billing an industrial consumer, whose legal representatives are additional respondents 6 to 8 herein. While so, the petitioner attained the age of superannuation, and retired as Senior Superintendent on 31/10/2004. Charge memo was issued and enquiry was held, and finally the loss caused to the Board was assessed at Rs.3,43,848/-, and the petitioner's individual liability was fixed at Rs.1,12,904/-. 2. Initially his DCRG was fully withheld, and subsequent to the filing of this writ petition, on the strength of the interim order obtained, after retaining the amount equivalent to the petitioner's liability as aforesaid, the balance amount has been released. Now that what remains is the prayer of the petitioner to release the WP(C) No.19585/2008 -2- amount withheld by the respondents, and to pay her interest for the belated payment. 3. The respondents points out that the additional respondents 6 to 8 contested the liability, and finally, on a writ petition filed by them, they have obtained an order enabling them to discharge the liability in instalments. It is stated that thereafter the total liability was quantified and was intimated to them and that they have started discharging the liability. It is also stated that if the balance amount of DCRG is released as sought for by the petitioner without any safeguards, and if the legal representatives of the consumer commit default in payment, it will be highly prejudicial to the interest of the Board. The Board, therefore, submits that there should be sufficient safeguards, if at all the prayer is to be considered. 4. The liability of the petitioner as aforesaid has now become final, and the only escape for the petitioner is that, the legal representatives of the consumer should discharge the liability, which they have already started. The petitioner can claim payment only after the liability is discharged and not at this stage. Therefore, WP(C) No.19585/2008 -3- it will be unfair to order release of the balance DCRG amount withheld by the Board, without any safeguard. 5. Having regard to the above, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:- That if the petitioner furnishes Bank Guarantee for the balance amount due from him, the Board will release the amount, and in case default is committed by the consumer, and the Board is unable to recoup its loss from them, it will be open to the Board to invoke the Bank Guarantee, and realize its dues. It is made clear that if the petitioner furnishes the Bank Guarantee as above, the amount will be released within one month thereafter. Alternatively, in case the petitioner is unable to furnish the Bank Guarantee, it is directed that depending on the remittances made by additional respondents 6 to 8, the respondent Board shall release to the petitioner proportionate amount from out of the DCRG that is withheld. The petitioner has claimed interest on the alleged delay in paying the DCRG. As already seen, since the liability of the petitioner has become final, as at present, the petitioner cannot claim payment of the amount and can seek its release only after the WP(C) No.19585/2008 -4- amount is realised from additional respondents 6 to 8. If so, there is no culpable delay, justifying an order for payment of interest. For this reason, the prayer for interest is rejected. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg