T BALAN Vs. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners in these two writ petitions were employees of the Kerala State Electricity Board. Both of them retired on 31.5.2005. In respect of misconduct committed by the petitioners in the matter of taking metre reading of a consumer, which led to huge loss to the Electricity Board, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioners, which ended in imposition of the punishment of withholding of next two increments with cumulative effect on the petitioners. That punishment has become final. THE loss caused to the Board on account of the misconduct committed by the petitioners was sought to be recovered from the petitioner from their DCRG. THEy also have not been paid monthly pension. THEy are being paid only provisional pension is the other grievance of the petitioners. It is under the above circumstances, the petitioners have filed these writ petitions seeking the following reliefs: W.P.(C).No.33794/2008:

(2.) THE primary contention of the petitioners is that the arrears of electricity charges caused on account of the error committed by the petitioners could and should have been recovered by the Board from the consumer in question and therefore, it cannot be said that the Board had suffered any loss in connection with the misconduct committed by the petitioners. THEy submit that the liability of the consumer to pay the amount has been confirmed by this Court by Ext.P4 judgment in W.P.(C).No. 27629/2003. THErefore, if at all there is any loss, it is because of inaction on the part of the Board in recovering the amounts from the consumer, is their contention.

(3.) W.P.(C).No.28751/2008, in which, this Court had stayed recovery of arrears of electricity charges from the consumer in question was dismissed by me today. Therefore, there is no impediment for the Board to recover that amount now. The petitioners' contention that notwithstanding whether the Board recovers the amounts from the consumer or not, it cannot be recovered from the petitioners does not find favour with me. But as and when the amounts are actually recovered from the consumer, the amounts withheld from their DCRG are liable to be disbursed to the petitioners. Accordingly, these writ petitions are disposed of with the following directions: The monthly pension due to the petitioners shall be disbursed within a period of one month with arrears. As and when the arrears of electricity charges are recovered from the consumer in question, corresponding amount withheld from the DCRG of the petitioners shall be released to them. However, it would be open to the Board to recover monetary equivalent of the punishment of barring of increments of the petitioners, from the DCRG of the petitioners. It would be open to the petitioners to approach the appropriate authority of the Board for review of the punishment, liberty for which is reserved for the petitioners in Ext.P2 in W.P.(C).No. 33794/2008.