IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 16TH ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 4277 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
CHUNGATHARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH
CHUNGATHARA P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679334,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
BY ADV U.K.DEVIDAS
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT
DEPARTMENT, 5TH FLOOR, SWARAJ BHAVAN, NANTHANCODE,
KOWDIAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003.
2 NOUSHADALI,
S/O.MUHAMMED, KADAKULATH HOUSE, CHANGATHARA P.O.,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679334.
3 OMBUDSMAN FOR THE LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT AUTHORITIES,
4TH FLOOR, SAPHALYAM COMPLEX, TRIDA BUILDING,
UNIVERSITY P.O., PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695034.
4 DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH,
CIVIL STATION ROAD, UPHILL, MALAPPURAM-676505.
BY ADVS.
P.SAMSUDIN
M.ANUROOP
SHYAM NAIR
LIRA A.B.
SMT.VIDYA KURIAKOSE, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 4277 OF 2022
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
------------------------------
W.P.(C).No. 4277 of 2022
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 07th day of July, 2022
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed with the following prayers:
"(i) a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction to call for the records leading to Ext.P7 order in Complaint No.976/2017 before the third respondent and quash the same.
(ii) a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction to the second respondent to reconsider the Ext.P7 order and drop further proceedings in Complaint No.976/2017 before the third respondent.
(iii) such other relief's as this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant in the nature of this case."[SIC]
2. The petitioner conducted 21 works in the grama panchayath under the National Rural Employment Scheme and Annual Projects of the grama panchayath during the year 2015-16. The 2 nd respondent supplied materials for the above said works. Since the amount WP(C) NO. 4277 OF 2022 3 due to the 2nd respondent was not paid within time, he filed complaint before the 3rd respondent, complaining that an amount of Rs.4,60,000/- is due from the petitioner as the value of the supplied materials for the above said work. Petitioner appeared in the complaint and filed objection on 24.07.2019 before the 3 rd respondent stating the facts and admitted amount due to the 2nd respondent. When Ext.P2 objection was filed, the 2nd respondent filed a reply statement before the 3 rd respondent as evident by Ext.P3. It is the case of the petitioner that, in Exts.P1 and P3 he did not claim any interest or compensation from the petitioner Grama Panchayath. Thereafter the third respondent directed the petitioner to disburse an amount of Rs.2,90,704/- to the 2nd respondent as evident by Ext.P4. Pursuant to Ext.P4 order, the 2nd respondent has received Rs.2,87,797/- after deducting T.D.S from Rs.2,90,704/- through his bank account on 8.11.2021. Thereafter, the 3rd respondent has issued another order on 09.11.2021 directing the petitioner to pay an interest on WP(C) NO. 4277 OF 2022 4 Rs.2,90,704/- at the rate of 9% per annum from 01.01.2017 onwards and directed the Secretary and Deputy Director of the Panchayath to recover the said amount from the responsible employees. Aggrieved by Ext.P7 order, this writ petition is filed.
3. Heard counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader and the counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent.
4. The counsel appearing for the petitioner reiterated his contentions in the writ petition. The counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent submitted that, an interlocutory application was filed for getting interest and cost for the delayed payment. The counsel for the petitioner disputed the same.
5. Whatever that may be, the admitted amount is already disbursed to the 2nd respondent by the petitioner. The payment of the interest is disputed by the petitioner. In such situation, it is not proper on the part of the Ombudsman to decide the interest especially when there is no such prayer in the original complaint filed by the 2 nd WP(C) NO. 4277 OF 2022 5 respondent. Therefore, the payment of interest by the Ombudsman can be set aside. But I make it clear that the 2nd respondent is free to approach the civil court to get interest, if he is entitled the same in accordance to law.
Therefore, this writ petition is allowed in the following manner:
i. Ext.P7 is set aside.
ii. The 2nd respondent is given liberty to approach the Civil court for interest, if he is eligible to get interest as per law.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN DM JUDGE WP(C) NO. 4277 OF 2022 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4277/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED NIL FILED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 24.7.2019.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT DATED 26.7.2019 BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
4.10.2021 PASSED BY THE THIRD
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION DATED
29.10.2021.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT RECEIPT.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
9.11.2021 ISSUED BY THE THIRD
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION NO. 9(I)
DATED 14.12.2021.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE