JAYACHANDRAN G.S. Vs. PRICIPAL SECRETARY,TVM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, while being employed as High School Assistant (SS) at St. John Higher Secondary School, retired from service on 30.4.2020. The Death Cum Retirement Gratuity (DCRG) of Rs. 13,60,260.00 due to the petitioner, sanctioned as per Ext.P1, has been withheld on account of Exhibit P5 Non-Liability Certificate issued by the Head Master of the School. It is mentioned in Exhibit P5 that liability to the tune of Rs. 3,48,562.00 stands outstanding in the name of the petitioner in view of a prohibitory order issued by the KSFE. This has led the petitioner to approach this Court with this Writ Petition.

(2.) The petitioner contends that the 7 respondent is a distant relative of the petitioner. While the petitioner and his wife were in service, they stood as sureties to various chitty loans availed by the 7 respondent from the KSFE, the 5 respondent. At the time of standing as a surety, an employment certificate signed by the petitioner and attested by the Headmaster of the School, who is the drawing officer, was presented before the 5 respondent. The undertaking so given by the petitioner permitted recovery from the monthly salary at source and from the terminal and other benefits. According to the petitioner, the terminal and other benefits mentioned in the employment certificate will not cover the DCRG. In view of the specific stipulation under Ruling No. 1 of Chapter I of Part-III KSR, the amount due from an employee to Government Companies, Local Bodies, Cooperative Societies etc, though not treated as Government dues, can be recovered from the DCRG payable, only with the consent in writing of the employee and not otherwise. In the said circumstances, the petitioner is stated to have approached the 2 respondent and submitted Ext.P7 representation requesting that the entire amount of DCRG be released dehors the liability shown in Ext.P5. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent failed to take appropriate action on his representation. It is in the said circumstances that the petitioner is before this Court seeking the following reliefs:"

(3.) A statement has been filed for and on behalf of the 5 respondent. It is stated that the petitioner along with his wife Smt. Lucy V.R, and another lady by the name of Ratnamma C., had stood as sureties for the loan availed by the 7 respondent. As the principal borrower failed to remit the amount, the KSFE initiated steps to recover the same from the guarantors. The petitioner proceeded against the property of the 7 respondent and secured a decree in his favour. Later, the property was purchased by the petitioner by initiating execution proceedings. It is further stated that the petitioner had signed and handed over Annexure-R5(A) Employment Certificate and had also consented to have the recovery effected from his salary at source and also from his terminal benefits. It is further stated that the petitioner had an option to pay the amount under the ASWAS 2020 scheme and if that option was exercised, the petitioner would be required to remit only an amount of Rs. 1,41,072/-. The respondent would further state that the petitioner had given his express consent and no provisions of the KSR was violated.