Kerala High Court
S.V.Kalesan vs The Honourable Kerala Lok Ayukta on 29 May, 2014
Author: A. Muhamed Mustaque
Bench: A.Muhamed Mustaque
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/18TH POUSHA, 1937
WP(C).No. 20670 of 2015 (G)
------------------------------------------
PETITIONER(S) :
--------------------------
S.V.KALESAN,
FINANCE OFFICER (SECRETARYIN CHARGE),
DISTRICT SECRETARY,DISTRICT PANCHAYATH, CIVIL STATION,
ALAPPUZHA-688 001, (FORMERLY) AND NOW WORKING
AS ADDITIONAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
BY ADVS.SRI.P.SUJITH KUMAR
SRI.N.KRISHNA PRASAD
RESPONDENT(S) :
----------------------------
1. THE HONOURABLE KERALA LOK AYUKTA,
LEGISLATIVE COMPLEX, ANNEXURE-I, VIKAS BHAVAN POST,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033,
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.
2. R.CHANDRASHEKARAN NAIR,
OMKARAM, GURUPURAM, ALAPPUZHA-688 006.
R1 BY ADV. SMT.RENU. D.P.,SC, LOK AYUKTA
R2 BY SRI. R.CHANDRASEKHARAN NAIR (PARTY-IN-PERSON)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 14-12-2015, ALONG WITH W.P.(C).NO.33978 OF 2015, THE COURT
ON 08-01-2016 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Msd.
WP(C).No. 20670 of 2015 (G)
------------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :
----------------------------------------
EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE
THE FIRST RESPONDENT WITHOUT EXHIBITS.
EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF FACTS FILED BY
THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT.
EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPLYFILED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT
TO EXT.P2.
EXT.P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 29-05-2014.
EXT.P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 10-03-2015.
EXT.P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 12-05-2015.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :
-------------------------------------------
EXT.R2(A): TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 20.08.2015 TO THE SECRETARY.
EXT.R2(B): TRUE COPY OF REPLY DATED 10.09.2015 FROM THE SECRETARY
AND ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
EXT.R2(C): COPY OF GOVT. ORDER DATED 02.04.2012.
EXT.R2(D): COPY OF REPORT OF TRANSFER OF CHARGE DATED 23.04.2012.
EXT.R2(E): COPY OF GOVT. ORDER DATED 13.05.2013.
EXT.R2(F): COPY OF GOVT. ORDER DATED 31.08.2013 SANCTIONING
COMMUTE LEAVE FOR THE PERIOD FROM 26.04.2013 TO
13.05.2013.
EXT.R2(G): COPY OF PROCEEDINGS DATED 01.06.2013 OF THE DISTRICT
PANCHAYAT SANCTIONING COMMUTED LEAVE FOR THE PERIOD
FROM 18.05.2013 TO 31.05.2013 AND ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A.TO JUDGE.
Msd.
A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J
--------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C).Nos. 20670 & 33978 of 2015
---------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 08th day of January, 2016
JUDGMENT
W.P.(C) No. 33978/2015 is filed by the Alappuzha District Panchayath. They challenge the orders passed by Kerala Upa Lok Ayukta produced as per Exts.P1 to P4.
2. W.P.(C).No.20670/2015 is filed by one S.V. Kalesan, the former Secretary of District Panchayath, Alappuzha, aggrieved by the same order.
3. The 2nd respondent in W.P.(C).No.33978/2015, namely R. Chandrasekharan Nair approached the Lok Ayukta complaining mal-administration in disbursing retirement benefits. He attributed mal-administration on the part of Shri. S.V.Kalesan. Shri. R.Chandrasekharan Nair retired as a Secretary of District Panchayath, Alappuzha.
4. By an order dated 29/05/2014, the Upa Lok Ayukta W.P.(C).No. 20670 & 33978 of 2015 -2- ordered Shri. S.V.Kalesan to release the salary arrears and other benefits. Thereafter, several orders have been passed and the Upa Lok Ayukta passed an order to pay the interest on account of delay. It is now admitted by Shri. R. Chandrasekharan Nair, who appeared as a party in person, that he received the entire amount except the interest ordered by the Upa Lok Ayukta. The Upa Lok Ayukta ordered to recover the interest amount from Shri. S.V. Kalesan.
5. Shri. R. Chandrasekharan Nair retired on 31/05/2013. It appears that the delay was due to objection in treating 18 days leave availed by Shri. R. Chandrasekharan Nair, this was later treated as commuted leave by the Government. It was noted that even after lapse of one year, the salary of Shri. R. Chandrasekharan Nair was not disbursed. Accordingly, it was ordered to be released as per the order dated 29/05/2015. In the same order, the Upa Lok Ayukta directed to disburse salary and comply by 12/06/2014. W.P.(C).No. 20670 & 33978 of 2015 -3- Thereafter, salary was paid on 10/06/2014 and noting that the delay involved was without justifiable reason, the Upa Lok Ayukta found that the complainant Shri. R. Chandrasekharan Nair is entitled for interest and ordered to secure the same from Shri. S.V. Kalesan.
6. The learned counsel for the panchayath submits that Shri. S.V. Kalesan is no longer in service and hence it is impossible for them to recover the amount ordered to be paid to Shri. R.Chandrasekharan Nair. It is further submitted that Shri. S.V. Kalesan is repatriatated to parent department. The learned Counsel also attempted to assail the order of awarding interest to Shri.R. Chandrasekharan Nair. This Court is of the view that the Panchayath cannot question the order of the Upa Lok Ayukta in awarding interest in asmuch as no liability is cast upon the Panchayath. However, their apprehension that they may not be able to recover the amount, will have to be considered by the Upa Lok Ayukta.
7. The learned counsel for Shri. S.V. Kalesan would argue that there is a difference between allegations and W.P.(C).No. 20670 & 33978 of 2015 -4- grievance as defined under Section 2 of the Kerala Lok Ayukta. It is further argued that the complaint of Shri. R. Chandrasekharan Nair is only a grievance and therefore, he is not entitled to get any interest by way of compensation. Further, he argued that Upa Lok Ayukta has no power to award interest.
8. The learned Standing Counsel for Lok Ayukta and Shri. Chandrasekharan Nair appeared in person would argue that Upa Lok Ayukta has necessary power under Section 13 of the Kerala Lok Ayukta to award compensation by calculating interest.
9. This Court is of the view that the matter requires a reconsideration by the Upa Lok Ayukta, especially, the Upa Lok Ayukta had no occasion to consider these aspects. Therefore, it is appropriate to remit these matters for consideration by Upa Lok Ayukta to advert to the objections raised now in both the writ petitions. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted for re-consideration by the Upa Lok Ayukta. W.P.(C).No. 20670 & 33978 of 2015 -5- Parties shall appear before the Upa Lok Ayukta on 21/01/2016. The Upa Lok Ayukta shall pass appropriate orders in this regard, after hearing all the parties.
The writ petitions are disposed of as above.
Sd/-
A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE bpr