High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt Kamala vs The Senior Accountant Officer on 19 October, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Smt Kamala vs The Senior Accountant Officer on 19 October, 2010
Author: Ram Mohan Reddy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 19?" DAY OF OCTOBER 

BEFORE

THE HON'I3LE MRJUSTTCE RAM ,MOF;AN"§§EIjDY  E 

WRET PETITION No.1956*Z/2:731..CiI (S58)  E  E" 'A

BETWEEN:

SMTRAMALA
w/O.SHANT1~1APRA   ..

AGED ABOUT 76YEARS.__    

RESIDING AT SRANKETHOTA HOUSE   

BAPPANAD VILLAGE   . '  ' ~

MULKYPOST  ._ g  _  
MANGALORE'§¥\L!;J¥{     _ 

DAKSHINA  " .j  "    . ...PETITIONER

(13?  ARIOA, ADV.)

AND:

 A.  1. mg SENIOR 'ACCOUNTANT OFFICER

_ 'FHI3"-'OFFICE OF ACCOUNTANT GENERAL
A  "(A&E]"KARN.ATAKA, BANGALORE
 .._EP.E..Ne.T.5369,.i.RARK ROAD
 BANGALORE-560 001

; 2. ;fi{E"'§.IO1i§fT COMMISSIONER

 COMMERCIAL TAXES (ENEORCEMEND
" 'WEST ZONE

 V. __N:lANGALORE D.K.  RESPONDENTS

L44

This W.P. is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of
the Constitution of India praying to quash.-“‘-the

order/ communication dated 26.02.2010 by respo1iden;t.”

No.1 (minexure C) and etc.

This WP. is coming on for””pi*e1irnina.ry’1

this day, the Court made the follotszingii ~

oxneg
The petitioner c};ai’.rns toiiiclassifl heir and
mother of the deceased served the

State as a ;’d1’iy_er in the “CoInme_rcia1 Tax Office,

Mangalore, – and-«.obtiain,e’d.___a [Succession Certificate in

P & scfCx¢;=5f2ooeC”an 7/11/2008, Annexli

wherenrider t”he_V_VV:p’etit:i0ner was entitled to the Death

R_etirernent Gratuity, GPF and other amounts in

Co§op’erat’i”_Ve accounts to the exclusion of a person

‘V by Bharathi, claiming to be the wife of

“‘..flr:1Aeceased U.S.Gopa1a. It is ascertained that Smt.

Lek

_ 3 –

Bharathi died sometime after 7/ 1 1 / 2008, but material

is Wanting in that regard in the petition. Aithough the

petitioner, through her learned Counsel, issued_4a.V_1’eg_alv

notice cit. 9/ 10/2009, Annexl), to the Senior .

Officer, Office of the Accountant G’-enerat.’V”(A&E)–L ii”

Karnataka, Bengaiuru and the

Commercial Tax (Enforcement): V
nevertheless, according to VA — learned Q’ ‘ Government
Counsel, the amounts dueto”IJ”:S:;Gt51§a1§,/tovvards Death

Cum Retirement forwarded to

the / much prior to the
legal notice, and is.-~not encashed.

in they cirisuinsitances, I think it appropriate to

ddirec-t«V’th’e petitionerdto make a representation enclosing

maaaaie’tataa Lok Adalath as Well as the death

Z””‘–._V:Officerz of the Office of the Accountant General (A&E)

certificate Smt. Bharathi, to the Senior Accounts

M

Karnataka, Bangalore, within 3. fortnight from today “and

if so done, the 18$ respondent is directed to c0nsi.giefftth~ev

said representation and pass orders in aCCOId§3.HCé”tiVi*Tfi”~’ ~

law ineiuding recalling of the amount’ it

District Treasury in the name of A

Petition is accordingly of; ‘