## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
## **PRESENT :**
## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN**
## **WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2010 / 21ST ASWINA 1932**
**WP(C).No. 33120 of 2005(P) --------------------------**
**PETITIONER(S):**
**---------------**
**DR.S.RADHA, RETIRED ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR, T.C.26/536, FLAT NO.1, ASRAMOM, BEHIND CENTRAL STADIUM, NEAR ADYAPAKA BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1.**
**BY ADV. SRI.K.L.NARASIMHAN**
**RESPONDENT(S):**
- **-----------------------**
**1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PLANNING AND ECONOMICS AFFAIRS (B) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.**
**2. THE DIRECTOR, INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT IN GOVERNMENT, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-33.**
**3. SECRETARY, INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT IN GOVERNMENT, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 33.**
**4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VANCHIYOOR, COLLECTORATE BUILDINGS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.**
**5. THE DIRECTOR, ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.**
- **R1 TO R5 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. A.J. VARGHESE R2 & R3 BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA**
**THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**...2/-**
**Mn**
## **WP(C).No. 33120 of 2005(P) -2-**
## **APPENDIX**
## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:**
- **EXT.P1 : COPY OF LETTER NO. 3228/FA5/2003/IMG DATED 13-10-03 ADDRESSED TO THE DIRECTOR, ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS DEPARTMENT.**
- **EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE NOTICE ON FIXATION OF LIABILITY NO. 3228/FA5/2003/IMG DATED FEBRUARY 2004.**
- **EXT.P3 : COPY OF REPLY DATED 22-6-04 BY PETITIONER TO EXHIBIT P2 DATED 7-6-04.**
- **EXT.P4 : COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO. 3228/FA5/2004/IMG AT 8-7-04 OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT.**
- **EXT.P5 : COPY OF THE REPLY BY PETITIONER DATED 15-7-04 ADDRESS TO DIRECTOR IMG.**
- **EXT.P6 : COPY OF LETTER NO. 3228/FA5/2004/IMG DATED 4-9-04 ADDRESS TO THE PETITIONER.**
- **EXT.P7 : COPY OF THE LETTER NO. EB (4) 10076/76/05/DES DATED 14-9-04 OF THE DIRECTOR OF ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS ADDRESSED WITH PETITIONER.**
- **EXT.P8 : DATED 6-10-04 COPY OF THE LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE DIRECTOR OF ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS BY THE PETITIONER.**
- **EXT.P9 : DATED 25-10-04 COPY OF THE LETTER FROM THE PETITIONER TO THE DIRECTOR OF ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS.**
- **EXT.P10 : COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO. 1971/B4/04/PLG DATED 9-11-04 FOR THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE FIFTH RESPONDENT.**
- **EXT.P11 : COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO. EB(4)10076/03/DES(3) DATED 8-12-04 ADDRESSED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE DIRECTOR OF ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS.**
- **EXT.P12 : DEMAND NOTICE FORM NO.1 NO. R5-24721/05 DATED 23-6-05 ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR TO THE PETITIONER.**
- **EXT.P13 : COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 25-8-05 BY THE PETITIONER SEEKING TIME WITH COPY TO DIRECTOR, IMG/V.O. VANCHIYOOR VILLAGE.**
**...3/-**
## **WP(C).No. 33120 of 2005(P) -3-**
## **RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:**
**EXT.R2(a) : COPY OF THE EXAMPLES OF THE PETITIONERS INABILITY TO EXPLAIN AWAY THE SATISFACTORY OF THE PAYMENTS MADE AND MONEY EXPENDED STATEMENT.**
**EXT.R2(b) : COPY OF THE CASH RECEIPT NO. 3442 DATED 4.10.2005 FOR RS. 490/-.**
**//TRUE COPY//**
**P.A. TO JUDGE**
**Mn**
## **S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ----------------------------------------W.P. (C) NO.33120 OF 2005 ---------------------------------------Dated this the 13[th] day of October, 2010.**
## **JUDGMENT**
The petitioner retired from service on superannuation on 31.12.2003 as Additional Director of the Economics and Statistics Department of the Government of Kerala. For a while the petitioner worked on deputation in the Institute of Management in Government, (IMG for short) from August 1992 to July 1995. In her capacity as Project Director of IMG, the petitioner was authorised to spend money to meet the expenditure in connection with the project work undertaken by the IMG with assistance from Ford Foundation. Alleging irregularities in the vouchers submitted by the petitioner noted by the audit department, proceedings were initiated against the petitioner for recovery of an amount of Rs.97,905/- from the petitioner. Initially proceedings were initiated by the Institute of Management in Government and thereafter the files were forwarded to the District Collector for recovery of the amount under the Kerala Public Accountants Act. Ext.P12 notice was issued by the District Collector to the petitioner under Section 3(2) of the Kerala Public
2
**W.P. (C) NO.33120 OF 2005**
Accountants Act, 1963, directing the petitioner to either remit the amount or to file reply, stating her objections. Pursuant to the same, Ext.P13 reply was submitted by the petitioner which reads as follows:-
_**“This has reference with demand notice No.R524721/05 dated 23-06-05 served on me on 22-08-05, under the provision of Kerala Public Accountant Act. It has been stated that the Institute of Management in Government, Thiruvananthapuram has a claim against me for Rs.979,105/-. I am given time for 30 days to remit the due or file objection if any. I have serious objection to the claim. No amount is due from me. I deny the claim. In fact I retired from service on 31.12.03 and I had explained to the I.M.G Director and the Accounts Officer of the institute, when the personal hearing was demanded. Even though the Director was kind enough to go through some of the vouchers, he expressed his inability to continue the hearing further. Without hearing me the quantum has been fixed. As I do not have copies of the vouchers, I may have to take copy thereof from the file of the institute before any explanation or objection is submitted. Considering the volume of records to be perused, I require at least, three months time to offer my objection to the claims put forth. I have objections to all of the claims. No recovery is tenable. Incidentally the service is also not in order as required under the Code of Civil Procedure. I request a reply with in 15 days.**_
_**This is without prejudice.”**_
Petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the proceedings initiated by Ext.P12 seeking the following reliefs:-
_**“i. To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ direction or order, directing the second respondent to release/supply to the petitioner the details (particulars of objection against the individual vouchers which have led to the claim of Rs.9,79,105/- as per Ext.P4, to enable the petitioner to offer her explanation therefor.**_
3
**W.P. (C) NO.33120 OF 2005**
_**ii. To direct the second respondent and its administrative wing to release to the petitioner the particulars of sanction issued against the expenditure incurred by the petitioner as project director, in respect of the vouchers not admitted.**_
_**iii. To declare that proceedings by the second/third/fourth respondents, against the petitioner under the Kerala Public Accountants Act 1963, leading to Ext.P12 and Ext.P12 and Ext.P12 are bad in law and void.**_
_**iv. To direct the second respondent to complete the hearing, pursuant to Ext.P6, and dispose of the same in accordance with law before pursuing any action for the recovery of the alleged liability.**_
_**v. Direct the fourth respondent, District Collector to keep in abeyance all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P12 without hearing the petitioner, and supplied with the objection against voucher, by the second/ third respondent, the authority at whose instance Ext.P12 is caused to have been issued.”**_
2. The petitioner raises two contentions. The first is that in respect of amounts due to the Institute of Management in Government which is a Society registered under the Travancore Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Act, no proceedings under the Kerala Public Accountants Act 1963 would lie, since the petitioner does not come within the purview of the definition of “Public Accountant” in Section 2(b) of the Kerala Public Accountants Act. The second is that petitioner has not been given sufficient details of the objections against the vouchers relied on by the respondents without which the petitioner cannot file any meaningful reply to Ext.P12 notice.
**W.P. (C) NO.33120 OF 2005**
4
3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. As far as the first contention is concerned, the petitioner can raise objections before the District Collector who has to consider the same in the first instance. As such I am not expressing any opinion in respect of that contention.
4. As far as the second contention of the petitioner is concerned, I do not find any such request by the petitioner in Ext.P13 reply submitted before the District Collector. All what she has stated in Ext.P13 is that she requires more time to file reply and that she should be supplied with copies of the vouchers. The second respondent has produced Ext.R2(b) receipt for photo copying charges received from the petitioner for supplying photo copies of vouchers given to the petitioner. The petitioner does not dispute that photo copies of the vouchers have already been supplied to the petitioner. What the petitioner contends now is that the petitioner is entitled to request for the details of the objections on the vouchers which has not been supplied to her. But from Ext.P13, I find that the petitioner has not made any such request before the District Collector and her request in Ext.P13 was only for time to peruse the vouchers. That being so I do not find any merit in this writ petition. Accordingly the same is
5
**W.P. (C) NO.33120 OF 2005**
dismissed subject to the right of the petitioner to raise contentions regarding jurisdiction of the District Collector, over the petitioner, under the Kerala Public Accountants Act, which question shall be considered by District Collector at the time of passing orders pursuant to Ext.P12 notice.
**S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE.**
mns
