High Court Kerala High Court

Nss vs State Of Kerala on 16 September, 2008

Kerala High Court
Nss vs State Of Kerala on 16 September, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

OP.No. 6513 of 2000(A)



1. NSS
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.G.PARAMESWARA PANICKER (SR.)

                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :16/09/2008

 O R D E R
                       S.SIRI JAGAN, J
                ==================
                    O.P.No.6513 of 2000
                ==================
       Dated this the 16th day of September, 2008.

                      J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is an educational agency running a private

aided college. One Smt. L. Bharghavi Amma was the principal

of the college who retired from service on 10.5.1986 on

attaining 60 years of age. She was granted pensionary

benefits. Subsequently the Deputy Director of Collegiate

Education, Thrissur fixed a liability of Rs. 5,83,555.20 on the

said Smt. L. Bharghavi Amma. The said Bharghavi Amma

challenged the steps to recover the liability from her

retirement benefits on the ground that the same is barred by

limitation, since the liabilities were not fixed until 23.4.1994

where as the said Bharghavi Amma retired from service in

1986. The contention of Smt. Bharghavi Amma was accepted

by this Court. Accordingly, this court directed the respondents

therein which are the State and the Government officers to

disburse the full pensionary benefits due to the said

Smt.Bharghavi Amma, with arrears and 12% interest.

Thereafter the Director of Collegiate Education, Thrissur

issued Ext.P2 order transferring the liabilities of the said

O.P.No.6513 of 2000 – 2 –

Bharghavi Amma to the petitioner, management. Ext.P2 is

under challenge before me.

2. The petitioner’s contention is that there is no provision

of law anywhere for recovery of amounts due from a principal

of an aided college from the management of the college.

3. A counter affidavit has been filed in which the

contention is that as per the direct payment agreement, the

Government has issued Ext.R1(a) (which is same as Ext.P3)

Government order which authorised transferring of such

liability to the management.

4. I have considered the rival contentions in detail.

5. The learned Government Pleader has not been able to

point out any provision of law either in the University statutes

or in the KSR which makes the management of an aided

college liable for amounts due from the principal of the

college. As far as the management is concerned, they are not

involved in any monetary transactions conducted by the

principal of their college. The amounts collected as fees etc

from the students by the principal are directly paid into the

Treasury by the the principal. At no point of time the

management of a college has any duty in respect of the same.

The money belonging to the Government does not come to the

O.P.No.6513 of 2000 – 3 –

hands of the management at any time. The accounts of the

college are also audited by the Deputy Director of education.

In fact apart from making appointments of teachers and staff

in the college and collecting maintenance allowance from the

Government no other amounts are paid to the management

either by the Government or by the principal. If any amounts

are to be fixed as liability on the principal it is the Deputy

Director of Education or the Director of Collegiate Education to

do the same and to recover it from the principal. Law does not

cast a duty in this respect also on the management. As such

the management cannot be made liable for any amounts due

from the principal.

6. Even going by Ext.R1(a), the liability can be transfered

to the management only with consent of the management that

to in respect of the nine items of amounts mentioned therein.

Neither in Ext.P2 nor in the counter affidavit filed before this

court has the respondents cared to give details of the liability

in recoverable from Smt. L. Bharghavi Amma sought to be

transferred to the management. That being so, by no stretch of

imagination can the management be made liable for amounts

due from the principal. As such Ext.P2 is clearly without

jurisdiction. Accordingly, Ext.P2 is quashed. It is declared

O.P.No.6513 of 2000 – 4 –

that the petitioner is not liable for any amounts due from the

said L. Bharghavi Amma. However, this shall not preclude the

respondents for recovering the liability form any other person,

who caused loss by not recovering the same from

Smt. L. Bharghavi Amma in time, of course after complying

with principles of natural justice, if they can validly do so at

this point of time

The writ petition is allowed as above.

S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
rhs