Kerala High Court
Balraj.A.S vs The State Of Kerala on 6 February, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
TUESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 17TH MAGHA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 25675 OF 2020
PETITIONER/S:
BALRAJ.A.S
KARTHIKA HOUSE,VALLIKUNNU NORTH(P.O),
PIN-673314,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
P.CHANDRASEKHAR
SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF
SMT.K.VIDYA
SHRI.SATHEESH V.T.
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF COOPERATION,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 THE REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695004.
3 THE JOINT REGISTRAR(GENERAL),
COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES,WAYANAD,
PIN-673121.
4 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
MALAPPURAM,PIN-676505.
5 THE TAHSILDAR,
TIRURANGADI,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,PIN-676306.
BY ADV SMT PRINCY XAVIER, GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 06.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.25675 of 2020 2
BASANT BALAJI , J.
------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.25675 of 2020
-----------------------------------
Dated this the 6th day of February 2024
JUDGMENT
The petitioner states that his father, Sri. Babyraj M., who
was the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies (Administration)
in the office of the 3rd respondent, passed away on 22.10.2017
while in service. Sri.Babyraj is survived by his wife, Anitha, the
petitioner herein and his daughter Karthika. Since the petitioner is
an unemployed youth, having no income, an application, Ext.P3,
was submitted before the 2nd respondent for getting
compassionate appointment under the Dying in Harness Scheme.
As per Appendix A of Ext.P3, Serial No.6, the total annual family
income of the deceased Government Servant has to be shown on
the basis of the certificate obtained from the concerned authority
(a copy of the same has also to be attached). It is seen from
Ext.P3 that the total annual family income of the petitioner is
shown as Rs.8,12,592/- on the basis of the income certificate
issued by the village officer.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would
refer to Ext.P2 and it is submitted that the ceiling limit of the
annual family income is Rs.8 Lakhs for getting compassionate
appointment. Since the total annual family income of the petitioner
is more than the limit, his application was rejected. He would also
refer to Clause 13 of Ext.P1 and it is submitted that the family
income to be reckoned is the actual income available to all
members of the family from all sources other than family pension.
It is also stated therein that in case of any disputes on income, the
case shall be referred to the concerned District Collector and the
income reported by the Collector shall be accepted as the actual
income.
3. The issue was referred to the 4th respondent and the 4th
respondent has issued Ext.P7 wherein it is stated that the annual
income of the petitioner's family is Rs.8,12,592/- on the basis of
the certificate issued as per the Government Order and since the
income is above the limit prescribed by the Government, the
application cannot be entertained.
4. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 5th
respondent wherein it is stated the petitioner's father died on
22.10.2017 while he was in Government Service and his mother is
working as Headmistress in an Aided Lower Primary School. It is
also stated in the counter affidavit that, based on Volume IV, para
248 of the Kerala Land Revenue Manual, the certificate issued by
the Village Officer and also in the light of Ext.P1 Government
Order, the total annual family income of the petitioner would come
to Rs.8,12,592/-. A copy of the Kerala Land Revenue Manual is
produced as Ext.R5(a).
5. The question arises for consideration is whether the
income tax has to be deducted from the total income so as to
arrive at the actual income available to the members of the family.
Since Ext.P1 Government Order prescribes that in case of any
disputes on income, the case shall be referred to the concerned
District Collector and the income reported by the Collector shall be
accepted as the actual income.
6. A perusal of Ext.P7 would show that the 4th respondent
has not taken into account whether the actual income includes the
income tax paid by the mother of the petitioner or not. As per
Ext.P6, the salary drawn statement, it is seen that an amount of
Rs.28,930/- is remitted as income tax. Therefore, this Court is of
the view that the 4th respondent has not applied his mind while
passing Ext.P7.
In that view of the matter, Ext.P7 will stand quashed. The
4th respondent is directed to reconsider the matter afresh and to
find out the actual annual income available to the members of the
family taking into consideration Exts.P1 and P2. While passing
orders, the 4th respondent shall also take into consideration the
specific contention of the petitioner that the income tax remitted
cannot be reckoned for calculating the actual income available to
the family. Orders shall be passed, as expeditiously, in any event,
within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of
this judgment.
Sd/-
BASANT BALAJI,
JUDGE
NS
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25675/2020
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(P)NO.12/99/P&ARD
DATED 24.05.1999 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O(P)NO.7/2018/P&ARD
DATED 28.04.2018 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
01.06.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.E.A.
(5)1313/2019 DATED 19.07.2019 OF THE 2ND
RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.A4-12755/2019
DATED 24.07.2020 OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT
TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPIES OF THE SALARY DRAWN
STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 AND
2018-19 OF THE PETITIONER'S MOTHER.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30.09.2020
OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.
