SHANMUGHAM K. Vs. REMA E.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Writ petition has been filed challenging Ext.P16 letter dated 31.10.2012 issued by the Deputy Director of Education, permitting to deduct ?5,000/- from the monthly salaries of the petitioner towards a loan taken by the 1st respondent, to which the petitioner was a guarantor.

(2.) According to the petitioner, he is working as Lower Division Clerk in the office of the Deputy Director of Education. The 1st respondent availed a personal loan of ?1,40,000/- in the year 2009 from the 3rd respondent. The petitioner stood as a surety to this loan. On failure of the 1st respondent to repay the loan, the 3rd respondent issued a letter dated 08.05.2009 to the 2nd respondent, who is the Headmistress of Government Higher Secondary School, Koduvayur, seeking confirmation of salary certificate and recovery undertaking given by the petitioner. Thereafter, the 3rd respondent started to recover the defaulted loan amount from the petitioner's salary. ?3,500/- was recovered from the salary for the month of November, 2010. Recovery continued thereafter.

(3.) The petitioner further states that on 21.02.2011, he was served with a show-cause notice from the 4th respondent seeking to show-cause why disciplinary action should not be taken against him for committing default in making payments to various financial institutions. Subsequently, on 31.10.2012, the petitioner was served with Ext.P16 intimation from the office of the 4th respondent stating that an amount of ?5,000/- will have to be recovered from his salary starting from the month of October, 2012 onwards. The petitioner states that his gross salary is only ?23,430/- and after making deductions towards statutory dues, advances, etc., he is receiving only ?15,752/-. If a further recovery at the rate of ?5,000/- is made from his salary, it will leave the petitioner to virtual penury. The petitioner therefore, challenges Ext.P16.