BINDIA K.G. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The captioned writ petitions are materially connected in respect of revenue recovery action taken against the petitioners as per sections 7 and 34 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, 1968. Two grounds are taken by the petitioner; (1) Kerala Revenue Recovery Act cannot be employed to recover dues from the petitioners, who are Central Government employees and (2)there is no quantification of the amount by any competent person, without which amount cannot be recovered under the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, especially due to the fact that, the enquiry launched against the petitioners are not yet finalised.

(2.) Petitioners are postal employees, who are proceeded under the provisions of Kerala Revenue Recovery Act against the alleged misappropriation of money by one MPKBY agent attached to Pulimath Post Office. As I have pointed out earlier, petitioners contend that, petitioners are co-operating with the enquiries and many witnesses have been examined. Fourth respondent has issued a second charge sheet under rule 16 of the CCS(CCA) Rules as a safeguard to fix the liability against the petitioners one way or other, evident from Ext.P3. Other contentions are also raised.

(3.) A detailed counter affidavit is filed by respondents justifying their action and also pointing out that, respondents are at liberty to recover the amount by initiating action under the provisions of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, 1968 and has invited my attention to the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in Superintendent of Post Office v. Annie Mathew [2002(1)KLT 676]. Paragraph 3 is relevant to the context, which read thus: