S. VENUGOPU, RESEARCH OFFICER (RTD.) Vs. STATE COUNCIL OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH AND TRAINING (SCERT.) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned counsel representing party respondents. The entire dispute is with regard to non payment of DCRG amount by the employer on the ground of available a consent from the appellant. Apparently, appellant was a surety to a loan availed by a borrower from the Trivandrum Co -operative Urban Bank Limited (the "Bank" for short). Ext.P1 is the consent deed in favour of the Bank empowering them to deduct from his salary/wages or from any amount he might be entitled to receive from his employer.

(2.) ACCORDING to the employer, thus, any amount he might be receiving from the employer includes DCRG benefits. Therefore, they are entitled to deduct the amount of loan and other dues from DCRG, in respect of loan to which the appellant was the surety.

(3.) ACCORDING to learned counsel for the appellant, a reading of Section 8 (1) and Schedule II of the Act would clearly indicate the competency of Lok Ayukta to deal with the dispute in question. He further contends that in sub Section (2) of Sec. 20 the word "forum" referred to in sub Section (2) has to be read as "form". Therefore, the complaint filed by the appellant before Lok Ayukta was justified as Lok Ayukta has jurisdiction to entertain the issue. We have gone through Sec. 8 (1) Schedule II and also sub -Sec. 2 of Sec. 20. Section 20 deals with protection of action taken in good faith. Sub Section 2 of Section 20 reads as under : -