C.V. Somarajan Nair v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: Antony Dominic
Anil K. Narendran
Judgment Date: 2014-09-25
Court Decision / Holding: The High Court set aside the Tribunal’s order withholding ₹75,095 with 9% interest and directed that the entire gratuity be released to the petitioner. It clarified that the respondents may recover any amount due under law, and the directions must be complied with within eight weeks. A post-judgment clarification states that the petitioner will be entitled to 9% interest on gratuity payable to him.
Final Disposition: OP(KAT) No.295/14 disposed of as above.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

C.V. Somarajan Nair

Respondents

State of Kerala
The Commissioner for Rural Development, LM.S Compound, Thiruvananthapuram
The Assistant Development Commissioner, Rural Development Department, Pathanamthitta
The Block Development Officer, Kattappana, Idukki District
The Block Development Officer, Pandalam, Pathanamthitta District
The Accountant General (Kerala), Thiruvananthapuram

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• M.V. Thamban
• R. Reji
• Thara Thamban
• B. Bipin
• Arun Bose

Counsels for Respondents

• S. Jamal

Case Synopsis & Summary

On 25 September 2014, a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court heard OP(KAT) No. 295 of 2014 challenging the Kerala Administrative Tribunal’s March 13, 2014 order in TA 3131/2012. The Tribunal had directed the petitioner’s DCRG (gratuity) to be partly withheld — Rs 75,095 with 9% interest from 1 December 2008 — and to finalize the liability. The petitioner, a retired Joint Block Development Officer, contended that recovery from DCRG is governed by Note 3 to Rule 3 of Part III of the Kerala Service Rules (KSR) and Rule 116, which cap liability at three years from retirement; he relied on a Division Bench judgment in Ratheesh S. Nair v. State of Kerala & Ors. (2014 (2) KLJ 858) to support the contention that liability cannot be fixed beyond the three-year window. The respondents argued that the liability fixed by the Tribunal (₹1,00,144) must be recovered from the DCRG, in accordance with the KSR. The High Court held that the three-year time-bar applies, set aside the Tribunal’s order withholding the amount, and directed the entire gratuity to be released to the petitioner, while clarifying that the respondents may recover any amount due under law. The judgment records that the petitioner would also be entitled to 9% interest on gratuity. The disposal notes OP(KAT) No. 295/14 disposed of accordingly."

Provisions of Law Cited

Note 3 to Rule 3, Part III Kerala Service Rules (KSR)Rule 116, Part III KSR

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The applicant contends that recovery from DCRG can be effected only within three years from retirement under Note 3 to Rule 3 of Part III KSR and Rule 116; he relies on Ratheesh S. Nair v. State of Kerala & Ors. (2014 (2) KLJ 858) to support the time-bar. The Tribunal’s order directing deduction of ₹75,095 with 9% interest from 1/12/2008 is argued to be beyond the permitted period and thus unlawful; the plea is for release of the full gratuity.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents submit that liability fixed by the Tribunal (₹1,00,144) is to be recovered from the DCRG in accordance with the KSR, and that the Tribunal acted within its powers. They contend that the liability was properly fixed and the withholding aligns with the legal framework; the Tribunal’s order is part of the process to determine the final liability.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Ratheesh S. Nair v. State of Kerala & Ors.	2014 (2) KLJ 858	Positive	Cited by the Division Bench to buttress the argument that recovery from DCRG is subject to a three-year time-bar under the KSR; used as supportive precedent.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** **PRESENT:** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN** **THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2014/3RD ASWINA, 1936** **OP(KAT).No. 295 of 2014 (Z)** **----------------------------** ## **AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN TA 3131/2012 of KERALA ADMINISTRATIVETRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 13-03-2014** ## **PETITIONER(S)/APPLICANT IN T.A.:** **-------------------------------------------------** **C.V SOMARAJAN NAIR JOINT BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER (RETIRED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE BDO, PANDALAM) RESIDING AT : CHELLADATHU, EZHUMATTOOR (PO) PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT** **BY ADVS.SRI.M.V.THAMBAN SRI.R.REJI** **SMT.THARA THAMBAN SRI.B.BIPIN SRI.ARUN BOSE** ## **RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS IN T.A.:** **-----------------------------------------------------------** ## **1. STATE OF KERALA** - **REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN 695 001** ## **2. THE COMMISSIONER FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT,L.M.S COMPOUND,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN 695 001.** **3. THE ASST.DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, PATHANAMTHITTA PIN 689 645** **4. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, KATTAPPANA, IDUKKI DISTRICT 685 508** **5. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, PANDALAM, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT PIN 689 501** **OP(KAT) NO.295/14** **-2-** ## **6. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL(KERALA), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN 695 001** ## **BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.S.JAMAL** **THIS OP KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-09-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **OP(KAT).No. 295 of 2014 (Z)** **----------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** **PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS -------------------------------------** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO 31426/ESTT,.B2/98/CRD DT 28-10-1998 ISSUED BY COMMISSIONER** **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE GRATUITY PAYMENT ORDER DATED 23-09-2008 ISSUED BY THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL** **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO 1385 DT 10-12-2008 ALONG WITH AUDIT** **REPORT ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT** **RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL** **---------------------------------------** **//True Copy//** **PA TO JUDGE** ## **Rp** ## **ANTONY DOMINIC & ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JJ. =============================== OP (KAT) No. 295 of 2014 ====================** ## **Dated this the 25[th] day of September, 2014** ## **J U D G M E N T** ## Antony Dominic, J. This OP is filed by the applicant in TA No.3131/12, who is aggrieved by the order dated 13[th] of March, 2014 passed by the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram. 2. Petitioner, who was a Joint Block Development Officer under the respondents, retired from service on 31/8/2008. His prayer in the T.A. was mainly to direct the respondents to release the DCRG amount due to him. The Tribunal by the impugned order directed DCRG amount to be released to the petitioner after deducing an amount of `75,095/- with 9% interest from 1/12/2008 till the date of payment. It was further directed that the 2[nd] respondent shall finalise the liability taking into account the objection of the petitioner also. 3. In this O.P., the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in view of the provisions contained in Note 3 to Rule 3 of Part III KSR, liability cannot be fixed beyond the period of three years and that recovery cannot be effected based on such fixation of liability from the DCRG due. Counsel also relied on the **OP(KAT) No.295/14** ## **: 2 :** Division Bench judgment of this Court in _**Ratheesh S. Nair v. State of Kerala & Ors.**_ (2014 (2) KLJ 858) to buttress the said contention. Therefore, according to him, direction of the Tribunal entitling the respondents to deduct `75,095/- with 9% interest thereon from 1/12/2008 from the DCRG due to him is illegal. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 5. According to the learned Government Pleader, in pursuance of the orders passed by the Tribunal, by order dated 9/7/14, the liability of the petitioner has been fixed at `1,00,144/-. In this OP, we are only concerned with the correctness of the order passed by the Tribunal entitling the respondents to withhold a part of the DCRG due to the petitioner towards the liability that is due from him. 6. The recovery from DCRG is permissible only if it is otherwise provided in the provisions of KSR. Note 3 to Rule 3 of Part III KSR and also the terms of Rule 116 fixes a time limit for such an action to three years from the date of retirement. In so far as this case is concerned, admittedly, the petitioner retired from service on 31/8/2008. If that be so, recovery from the DCRG **OP(KAT) No.295/14** **: 3 :** based on fixation could have been possible only if the liability is fixed within three years from the date of retirement. This position is also covered by the Division Bench judgment referred above. If that be so, the direction of the Tribunal entitling the respondents to withhold `75,095/- together with interest at 9% from 1/12/2008 cannot be sustained. 7. We, therefore, set aside the order of the Tribunal entitling the respondents to withhold an amount of `75,095/- with 9% interest from 1/12/2008 till the date of payment and order that the entire gratuity due to the petitioner shall be released to him. However, it is clarified that this judgment will not in any manner affect the right of the respondents to recover the amount, if any, due to them in accordance with the provisions of law. The above directions shall be complied with, at any rate, within eight weeks of receipt of a copy of this judgment. OP(KAT) is disposed of as above. Sd/- **ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE** Sd/- **ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE** As per order dated 23/10/2014 in I.A 14087/2014 in OP(KAT) Rp ## **OP(KAT) No.295/14** **: 4 :** 295/2014, the 7[th] paragraph of the judgment dated 25/09/2014 in OP (KAT) 295/2014 is clarified as follows: “It is clarified that as ordered by the Tribunal, the petitioner will be entitled to 9% interest on the gratuity that is payable to him.” Sd/- **Registrar (Judicial)** ## **OP(KAT) No.295/14** **: 5 :** //True Copy// PA to Judge