High Court Kerala High Court

K.P.Cleetus vs The Commissioner on 27 July, 2010

Kerala High Court
K.P.Cleetus vs The Commissioner on 27 July, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 10377 of 2006(I)


1. K.P.CLEETUS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE COMMISSIONER,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :27/07/2010

 O R D E R
                       ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                    ================
                 W.P.(C) NO. 10377 OF 2006 (I)
                 =====================

             Dated this the 29th day of July, 2010

                          J U D G M E N T

The prayer sought in this writ petition is to direct the

respondents to declare the probation of the petitioner with effect

from the date on which he had completed two years service and

to grant him all monetary benefits.

2. In the counter affidavit filed by the second

respondent, in Para 5 it is stated thus:

“The second and further increments to the
incumbent was erroneously sanctioned to the
individual by the Head of Offices without
declaration of probation. Hence it requires that
he should remit the amount erroneously
sanctioned to him before declaration of
probation. The probation can be declared as
and when the individual remit the amount to
Government, which has been sanctioned
erroneously. The representation of the
petitioner has been considered and necessary
directions have been given to the Tahsildar,
Peermade to furnish proposal to this office after
remittance of amount erroneously sanctioned to
the individual, as and when the representation
received in this office.”

3. Since the facts stated above are uncontraverted, the

right of the respondents to realise the amount erroneously paid to

the petitioner cannot be disputed. Counsel for the petitioner

WPC No. 10377/06
:2 :

submits that on attaining the age of superannuation, petitioner

retired from service in 2009 and that on the ground that

probation has not been declared, his terminal benefits have not

been disbursed so far.

4. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner has retired

from service and as according to the counsel, terminal benefits

are still remaining unpaid, I feel it is only appropriate that

respondents shall recover the amount, if any due, on account of

the erroneous payment made from out of the terminal benefits

and the balance amount admittedly due to the petitioner should

be disbursed.

5. In view of the above, I dispose of this writ petition with

the following directions.

(1) That the respondents shall declare the probation of the

petitioner, without insisting on the petitioner remitting the

amounts erroneously received by him towards increments.

(2) The amounts if any to be remitted by the petitioner

shall be recovered from the terminal benefits that are due to him

and the balance amount alone shall be disbursed to him.

(3) Steps in the above direction shall be initiated and

WPC No. 10377/06
:3 :

amounts shall be disbursed to the petitioner as expeditiously as

possible, at any rate within three months of production of a copy

of this judgment.

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp