Research › Search › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 1162 (KER)

Latha E v. State of Kerala

2025-05-13

N.NAGARESH

body2025
JUDGMENT : N.NAGARESH, J. The petitioner, who is retired from Parudur High School, Pallippuram as Headmaster, is before this Court seeking to direct respondents 1 to 3 and 5 to dispatch the entire amount of Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity (DCRG) due to the petitioner on account of her retirement from service with 12% interest. 2. The petitioner joined service as High School Assistant on 17.07.1989 at Parudur High School, Pallippuram. The petitioner was appointed as Headmistress in the School with effect from 01.04.2020. The petitioner retired from service on 30.04.2022. The DCRG due to the petitioner has not been disbursed. 3. The petitioner states that while working as Headmistress, a communication was received stating that the amount to be remitted for textbooks for the period from 2010– 2017 and 2017–2018 is finalised as Rs. 2,52,800/-. The School was required to remit the said amount with 18% interest. In a further communication, it was stated that for the year 2018–2019, an amount of Rs. 1,98,900/- is due towards purchase of textbooks. The petitioner took steps and remitted Rs. 3,51,700/- along with interest of Rs. 42,204/- and the payment was intimated to the 4 th respondent. 4. In the meanwhile, the retired Headmistress requested for issuance of Non-liability Certificate. A Non- liability Certificate was issued to the retired Headmistress on an undertaking that she will remit the amount, if any amount found due towards textbook for the period from 2010 to 2020. On 10.07.2023, Ext.P5 communication was issued by the 4 th respondent informing that there is liability of Rs. 3,90,085/- from the School. The amount claimed in Ext.P5 was in fact, already remitted. On 10.11.2023, the 4 th respondent issued Ext.P6 demand claiming Rs. 2,22,706/- amount due for remittance for the period from 2012 to 2022. 5. The petitioner came to know that some amounts had to be remitted towards cost of textbooks for the year 2021–2022. The School had remitted Rs. 28,317/- on 11.10.2022 and Rs. 13,004/- on 01.02.2023. The 4 th respondent has again issued Ext.P8 communication dated 16.01.2024 stating that an amount of Rs. 6,48 473/- is due from the School. In Ext.P8, liability shown for the period 2020–2021 is non- existent, contends the petitioner. The petitioner was served with Ext.P9 communication, wherein liability was computed as Rs. 25,91,862/-. The petitioner states that the amount computed in Ext.P9 is clearly wrong and misleading. 6,48 473/- is due from the School. In Ext.P8, liability shown for the period 2020–2021 is non- existent, contends the petitioner. The petitioner was served with Ext.P9 communication, wherein liability was computed as Rs. 25,91,862/-. The petitioner states that the amount computed in Ext.P9 is clearly wrong and misleading. The petitioner was further served with Ext.P10 hearing report, alleging liability during the period when the petitioner acted as Headmistress. 6. The petitioner challenges Exts.P5, P6, P8 and P9. The petitioner urged that no liability can be imposed on the petitioner on the basis of Exts.P5, P6 and P8. The amount claimed in Exts.P5 and P6 is pertaining to a period, when the petitioner was not the Headmaster. The liability for the period from 2012 to 2020 was cleared. Furthermore, the former Headmistress had given an undertaking to discharge liabilities during the period when she acted as Headmistress. 7. The 4 th respondent-Textbook Officer filed a counter affidavit. The 4 th respondent stated that he has fixed an amount of Rs. 3,51,700/- as liability and issued notice dated 08.10.2020. Even though the said amount was remitted by the School on 12.7.2021 at Treasury, the matter was not brought to the notice of the 4 th respondent till 15.6.2023. Thereafter, the 4 th respondent revised the liability to Rs. 4,70,003/-. 8. The liability has been fixed on the basis of documents and declarations given by the Secretary of the School Society. The proforma submitted by the concerned authority of the Society claimed that they have received books worth Rs. 5,18,297/- during the year 2020-2021. Later, the School informed that Rs. 1,24,516/- worth books were actually received by the School during 2019-2020. Hence, the liability was revised to Rs. 2,22,706/-. The School has informed that they have remitted Rs. 28,317/- on 11.10.2022 and Rs. 13,004/- on 01.02.2023. But this was not intimated and challan / receipt has not been produced till date. 9. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1 to 4. I have also heard the learned counsel appearing for the 6 th respondent. 10. The petitioner worked as Headmistress in the School for the period from 01.04.2020 to 30.04.2022. While the petitioner was working as Headmistress, Ext.P2 communication dated 08.10.2020 of the 4 th respondent-Text Book Officer was received informing that there is a liability of Rs. I have also heard the learned counsel appearing for the 6 th respondent. 10. The petitioner worked as Headmistress in the School for the period from 01.04.2020 to 30.04.2022. While the petitioner was working as Headmistress, Ext.P2 communication dated 08.10.2020 of the 4 th respondent-Text Book Officer was received informing that there is a liability of Rs. 2,52,800/- for the period from 2011-2012 to 2017-2018. Ext.P3 communication dated 08.10.2020 was also received demanding Rs. 3,51,700/- for the period from 2011-2012 to 2018-2019. 11. The petitioner has submitted reply to the communications. The petitioner was not the Headmistress during this period. The petitioner had issued Non-liability Certificate to the retired Headmistress concerned, after the Headmistress concerned gave an undertaking that any amount found due can be recovered from the said retired Headmistress. Therefore, the petitioner cannot be held liable for payment of the amount indicated in Exts.P2 and P3. 12. Subsequently, after the retirement of the petitioner, Ext.P5 communication dated 10.07.2023 was issued by the 4 th respondent, wherein it has been stated that for the year 2020-2021 there is arrears of Rs. 3,67,372/- and for the year 2021-2022 there is arrears of Rs. 4,22,905. In Ext.P5, an amount of Rs. 3,84,974/- is stated to be due for the years 2012- 2013 to 2017-2018. The total amount to be paid is written as Rs. 3,90,085/-. Though various amounts are indicated as paid, it is not clear against the dues of which academic year, such remittances are made. 13. Similar issues are found in Ext.P6 communication also, where the amount payable by the School / Society has come down to Rs. 2,22,706/-. Even according to the 4 th respondent, as stated in counter affidavit dated 20.02.2024, the amounts remitted by the School on 11.10.2022 and Rs. 13,004/- in the year 2022-23 were not credited to the account till that date. Exts.P8 and P9 also suffer from similar lack of clarity. In the circumstances, the entire matter indeed requires reconsideration. At the same time, the DCRG amount payable to the petitioner cannot be withheld indefinitely. In the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of setting aside Exts.P5, P6, P8, P9 and P10 and directing the 4 th respondent to recompute the amount due for each academic year, after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and respondents 5 and 6. In the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of setting aside Exts.P5, P6, P8, P9 and P10 and directing the 4 th respondent to recompute the amount due for each academic year, after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and respondents 5 and 6. As the petitioner has issued Non-liability Certificate to the former Headmistress after obtaining undertaking from her, no amount other than for the period from 01.04.2020 to 30.04.2022 shall be recoverable from the petitioner. Final orders in this regard shall be passed within a period of three months.