High Court Kerala High Court

C.Sahayadas vs The Director Of Treasuries on 4 August, 2009

Kerala High Court
C.Sahayadas vs The Director Of Treasuries on 4 August, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 21964 of 2009(M)


1. C.SAHAYADAS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE DIRECTOR OF TREASURIES,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA,

3. THE SUPERINTENDENT,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.G.ARUN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN

 Dated :04/08/2009

 O R D E R
                               P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.
                 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
                         W.P.(C) No. 21964 of 2009
                 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
                  Dated this the 4th day of August, 2009

                                JUDGMENT

The petitioner, who is presently working as Junior Superintendent in

Sub Treasury, Neyyattinkara, has filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P16

order passed by the Director of Treasuries fixing the sum of Rs.62,500/- as

his liability and directing recovery of the said amount from his salary.

2. The pleadings disclose that Ext.P16 order has been passed,

pursuant to Ext.P14 memo of charges, in exercise of the power conferred on

the Director of Treasuries under the provisions of the Kerala Civil Services

(Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1960. Under rule 23 of the said

Rules, the petitioner has the right to file an appeal challenging Ext.P16

order. Under rule 25 of the Rules, the period of limitation for filing an

appeal is two months from the date on which a copy of the order appealed

against has been received by the appellant. In the instant case Ext.P16 order

is dated 3-7-2009. Even going by the date of Ext.P16, the period of

limitation prescribed for filing an appeal has not expired. Since the

petitioner has an effective alternate remedy by way of appeal under rule 23

W.P.(C) No. 21964/09 2

of the Rules, I am of the opinion that the petitioner should invoke the

appellate remedy instead of seeking the intervention of this Court at this

stage.

I accordingly dispose of this writ petition with the direction that in

the event of the petitioner filing an appeal challenging Ext.P16 within time

prescribed under rule 25 of the Rules, the appellate authority shall consider

the same and pass orders thereon expeditiously and in any event within four

months from the date on which such an appeal is received, after affording

the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The contentions of

the petitioner on the merits are kept open. Till such time, recovery pursuant

to Ext.P16 from the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance.

P.N.RAVINDRAN,
JUDGE.

mn.