Disposed

Dr.Joseph James v. the Registrar

Kerala HC29 Nov 2012WP(C)/8768/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a retired Deputy Director of Physical Education, challenged the University's Non-Liability Certificate alleging excess pay liabilities. The court directed the University to consider and decide the petitioner's representation afresh after a hearing, leaving all other issues open pending the outcome.

What did the court decide?

Directed the University to consider and pass appropriate orders on the petitioner's representation dated 18.02.2010 after affording an opportunity of hearing within six weeks.

Dr.Joseph James Vs the Registrar — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012/8TH AGRAHAYANA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 8768 of 2010 (U)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

DR.JOSEPH JAMES MNRA 108A, MAVELI NAGAR, CHANGAMPUZHA NAGAR.P.O KOCHI - 682 033.

¶8

BY ADV. DR.GEORGE ABRAHAM

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE REGISTRAR, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, KOCHI - 682 022.

¶11

2. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶12

3. GOVERNMENT AUDITOR, LOCAL FUND AUDIT, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY KOCHI - 682 022.

¶13

R1 BY ADVS. SRI.SURIN GEORGE IPE

¶14

SRI.SUNIL CYRIAC, SC, COCHIN UNIVERSITY SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAI, SC,COCHIN UNIVERSITY R2 & R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29-11-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

DCS

¶17

WP(C).No. 8768 of 2010 (U)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS :-

¶20

EXHIBIT-P1- COPY OF THE UNIVERSITY ORDER NO. FIN. II/F/842/91-92 DATED 02.11.1998 INDICATING THE POST OF SENIOR LECTURER REDESIGNATED AS ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF PHYSICAL EDUCATION W.E.F. 01.01.1986 AND ALSO FIXATION OF PAY

¶21

EXHIBIT-P2- COPY OF THE UNIVERSITY ORDER NO. FIN.V/F/UGC/2001-02 DATED 01.12.2001 PLACING THE PETITIONER TO THE POST OF DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PHYSICAL EDUCATION

¶22

EXHIBIT-P3- COPY OF THE UNIVERSITY ORDER NO. FIN.IV/436/P/2008-09 DATED 07.09.2009 REGARDING THE PENSION PAYMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER

¶23

EXHIBIT-P4- COPY OF THE LETTER FROM UNIVERSITY'S FINANCE OFFICER NO. FIN.V/EXCESS PAY/09-10 DATED 29.09.2009 DISALLOWING PAY FIXATION, CREDIT OF ADVANCE INCREMENT AND GRANT OF STAGNATION INCREMENTS.

¶24

EXHIBIT-P5- COPY OF THE NON-LIABILITY CERTIFICATE NO.AD.D1/02324/ADPE/1999 DATED 24.11.2009 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT REGISTRAR TO THE PETITIONER

¶25

EXHIBIT-P6- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 18.02.2010 GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO THE IST RESPONDENT REGISTRAR

¶26

EXHIBIT-P7- COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF PAY RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE PERIOD FROM JUNE 1990 TO APRIL 2008

¶27

EXHIBIT-P8- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE FINANCE OFFICER, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PHYSICAL EDUCATION

¶28

EXHIBIT-P9- COPY OF THE ORDER OF COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY DATED 23.11.2011

¶29

EXHIBIT-P10- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5899/2012

¶30

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS :-

¶31

EXHIBIT-R1(a)- COPY OF THE LETTER NO. LF(CUSAT) A4-283/2008 DATED 14.07.2009 EXHIBIT-R3(a)- G.O.(P) NO. 79/90/H.EDN DATED 27.03.1990

¶32

DCS

¶33

WP(C).No. 8768 of 2010 (U)

¶34

EXHIBIT-R3(b)- LR. NO. 46529/B2/90/H.EDN DATED 18.02.1991 EXHIBIT-R3(c)- G.O.(P) NO. 110/2000/H.EDN DATED 04.07.2000 EXHIBIT-R3(d)- GOVT. LR. NO. 14975/C3/2007/H.EDN DATED 30.07.2007 EXHIBIT-R3(e)- U.O. FIN.V/U.G.C-01-02 DATED 01.12.2001 EXHIBIT-R3(f)- GOVT. LR. NO. 32128/C3/2007/H.EDN DATED 18.11.2008

/TRUE COPY/

P.A TO JUDGE

DCS

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶39

W.P. © No.8768 OF 2010

¶40

Dated this the 29^th November, 2012

¶41

J U D G M E N T

¶42

The petitioner, who has retired from the service while

¶43

working as Deputy Director of Physical Education in the Cochin University of Science and Technology on 30.04.2008, has approached this Court with the following prayers:

¶44

“i)) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order or direction to 1^st respondent, for a correction of para (04) of Ext.P2, so as to promote the petitioner, notionally, without financial benefits, as Deputy Director of Physical Education from 01.01.1991, instead of 05.02.1991.

¶45

ii) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order or direction declaring that Ext.P3 pension payment order of the 1^st respondent is legal and valid.

¶46

iii) to issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or order or direction to quash Ext.P5 orders regarding the alleged liability of Rs.1,06,528/- towards excess pay drawn

¶47

¶48

¶49

on account of petitioner's pay fixed in the revised pay scale

¶50

iv) to issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or order or direction to quash Ext.P5 orders regarding the alleged liability of Rs.3120/- towards excess HRA/CCA drawn by the petitioner.

¶51

v) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order or direction to the 1^st respondent to provide the petitioner with a fresh non-liability certificate without imposing the liabilities of Rs.1,06,528/- towards excess pay drawn and of Rs.3120/- towards excess HRA/CCA.

¶52

vi. to issue any other writ or order or direction that this Honourable Court may deem fit to impose in the just disposal of the case. ”

¶53

The reliefs sought for by the petitioner have been opposed by the respondents by filing a detailed counter affidavit and the petitioner has filed a reply affidavit as well.

¶54

The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the main challenge is in respect of the NLC (Non-Liability Certificate) issued by the University, whereby liability has been fixed to an

¶55

¶56

¶57

extent of Rs.1,06,528/-, which does not keep the right track of truth, as it is contrary to the facts and figures. In the said circumstance, the petitioner has approached the University by filing Ext. P6 representation date 18.02.2010, which is still to be acted upon. On enquiry, the petitioner was made to understand that Ext.P5 Non-Liability Certificate dated 24.11.2009 was issued by the University in conformity with the Audit objection (Ext.P7 statement). The learned Counsel also submits that the petitioner is entitled to have the benefit of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in Chandi Prasad Uniyal & others vs. State of Uttarakhand ( 2012 (8) SCC 417 ) and that, for the time being, the petitioner would be satisfied, if a direction is given to the University to consider and finalise Ext.P6, after affording an opportunity of hearing to him.

¶58

Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the University as well as the learned Government Pleader.

¶59

The first respondent University is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, on Ext.P6 after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, at the

¶60

¶61

¶62

earliest, at any rate, within 'six' weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. All issues are left open, to be agitated

¶63

by the petitioner, if it becomes necessary, subject to the orders

¶64

to be passed by the University, as aforesaid.

¶65

The writ petition is disposed of.

¶66

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.

¶67

Dr.Joseph James v. the Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr.Joseph James v. the Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sreekumar Vs District Educational Officer

K.a.Sivan Vs Director,Urban Affairs

Dr.Balachandran Keezhoth Vs Kannur University & Others

V.C.Prajitha Vs the Assistant Educational Officer

N.M. Majeed Vs the Manager

V.T.Thomas Vs the Chief Engineer (Hrm)