Kerala High Court
V.Omana vs Union Of India on 23 May, 2024
Author: P Gopinath
Bench: P Gopinath
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MAY 2024 / 2ND JYAISHTA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 3345 OF 2015
PETITIONER/S:
V.OMANA, AGED 64 YEARS
W/O.RAJAN, ATHIKKODE.P.O., NATTUKAL VIA,
CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-678 554.
BY ADV SRI.P.K.MOHANAN(PALAKKAD)
RESPONDENT/S:
1 UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATION AND TECHNOLOGY,
VIKAS BHAVAN, NEW DELHI, PIN-110 001.
2 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.
3 RURAL DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.
4 BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICE, CHITTUR, NATTUKAL (POST),
PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-678 554.
5 GENERAL EXTENSION OFFICER
CHITTUR BLOCK (POST) NATTUKAL, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD
DISTRICT, PIN-678 554.
6 THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY,
CHITTUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-678 554.
BY ADVS.
ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL
GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SRI. T C KRISHNA (DSGI IN CHARGE),
SMT. THUSHARA JAMES (SR GP)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 3345 OF 2015 2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner was appointed as an Agent of 'Mahila
Pradhan Kshetriya Bachat Yojana' (MPKBY), a small savings
scheme launched by the Government of India in the year
1980. The petitioner is entitled to remuneration at the rate of
4% for recurring deposit collection and 1.25% as bonus at the
end of one year for the total amount collected towards
recurring deposit. The petitioner was also entitled to 1% of
the amount collected as fixed deposit.
2. On the premise that there were bogus claims
submitted by the petitioner for remuneration and for bonus,
in the year 2019, the petitioner was called upon to pay a sum
of Rs.5,70,965/- (Rupees Five lakhs seventy thousand nine
hundred and sixty five only) which is the amount stated to
have been received in excess of the entitlement of the
petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that, under a threat
of criminal prosecution, the petitioner remitted the said
amount and a further amount of Rs.25,580/- as demanded and
expected that her agency would be continued. However, by
Ext.P5 proceedings dated 17.12.2009, the agency of the
petitioner was terminated. After about 5 years, by Ext.P6
dated 8.04.2014, the petitioner was called upon to remit a
further sum of Rs.4,76,002/- (Rupees Four lakhs seventy six
thousand and two only), which was stated to be the penal
interest on the excess amount of remuneration and bonus that
was received by the petitioner. It is challenging this demand
for interest that the petitioner has approached this Court by
filing the above writ petition.
3. The 4th respondent (Block Development Officer,
Chittoor) has filed a statement. According to the statement
filed by the 4th respondent, an amount of Rs.31,209/- is due
towards the principal amount due from the petitioner and a
sum of Rs.4,44,793/- (Rupees Four lakhs forty four thousand
seven hundred and ninety three only) is due towards the
interest at the rate of 18% per annum. The circumstances
under which the petitioner claimed and obtained
remuneration and bonus that was not due to her has also been
explained in detail by the 4th respondent in his statement.
4. The 3rd respondent has filed a counter affidavit
reiterating the contentions in the statement filed by the 4 th
respondent and also pointing out the proceedings of the
Legislative Public Accounts Committee for 2011-14. The
counter affidavit of the 3rd respondent shows that the
petitioner had remitted Rs.5.71 lakhs towards the principal
amount and interest to the tune of Rs.25,580/-. It is pointed
out that Legislative Public Accounts Committee did not agree
with the imposition of the interest of Rs.25,580/- and directed
the recovery of penal interest at the rate of 18% per annum.
5. The 1st respondent has also filed a counter
affidavit.
6. The learned Government Pleader has also filed a
memo pursuant to the directions issued by this Court, on
22.07.2015, showing the way in which the interest due from
the petitioner had been calculated. Learned Senior
Government Pleader submits that since the fact that the
petitioner had received remuneration and bonus in excess of
entitlement is practically admitted, there is no illegality,
whatsoever, in demanding interest on the amount defrauded
as the petitioner had enjoyed the benefit of amounts not
actually payable to her, for a substantial number of years.
7. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, in
reply, would submit that, after having terminated the agency
of the petitioner in the year 2009 and after having collected
the entire amount due from the petitioner even prior to the
termination, after about five years, for the first time, through
Ext.P6, additional interest @ 18% per annum was demanded
from the petitioner. It is submitted that there is no statutory
fixation of any rate of interest and even assuming that the
petitioner had admitted the liability, the petitioner has not
agreed to pay interest @ 18% per annum. In other words, it is
the case of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
that even if this Court finds that the petitioner is liable to pay
interest, in the facts and circumstances of this case, the same
should not be at an exorbitant rate @ 18% per annum.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also submits that
certain amounts are due to the petitioner from the
respondents (towards refund of security deposit, welfare fund
etc.,) .
8. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner, learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for
respondent Nos.2 to 6 and Sri.T.C Krishna, learned counsel
appearing for the 1st respondent, I am of the view that the
petitioner can be given some relief in the matter of rate of
interest. As rightly pointed out by the learned Senior
Government Pleader, the fact that the petitioner had received
remuneration and bonus in excess of entitlement is not
seriously disputed. The said amount has also been paid by the
petitioner. The demand for interest @ 18% per annum is
raised for the first time, nearly five years after the petitioner
had paid off the amounts directed to be paid by the Block
Development Officer. No doubt, from the counter affidavit of
the 3rd respondent, it is clear that the demand was made on
the basis of the directions issued by the Legislative Public
Accounts Committee, which found that interest had not been
recovered from the petitioner. However, the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner is right in contending that there is
no statutory provision which permits the recovery of interest
@ 18%. Revenue Recovery is only a mode of recovery and if
the respondents were to have filed a suit for recovery of the
amounts due from the petitioner, the amount of interest
payable by the petitioner, atleast from the date of the suit
would have been at the discretion of the court.
9. Taking all the aforesaid facts cumulatively into
consideration and considering the fact that the petitioner had
paid the principal amount demanded from the petitioner
immediately on such demand being raised, I am of the view
that the rate of interest payable by the petitioner can be
reduced to 6% simple interest instead of 18% penal interest
now demanded from the petitioner.
Accordingly, this writ petition is ordered in the following
manner:-
1. The petitioner shall remit a sum of Rs.31,209/-
(which is stated to be the balance of the principal
amount payable by the petitioner) in the Government
Treasury, within a period of three months from today;
2. The 4th respondent shall recalculate the interest
payable by the petitioner at the rate of 6% per annum
instead of 18% per annum and shall intimate to the
petitioner the amount payable in that manner, within a
period of one month from the date of receipt of a
certified copy of this judgment. Considering the fact
that there was no demand for payment of interest till
the issuance of Ext.P6 on 08.04.2014, it is directed that
the interest as above shall be calculated only from
08.06.2014;
3. The amount so intimated by the 4th respondent,
as directed above, shall be paid by the petitioner in six
monthly instalments, commencing from the 1st day of
July, 2024. The subsequent instalments shall be paid on
or before the first working day of each of the
succeeding months.
4. No further interest shall be payable by the
petitioner for the six months period during which
instalments have been given to the petitioner by virtue
of this judgment;
5. If the petitioner fails to pay any of the amounts,
as directed above, it will be open to the respondents to
proceed to recover the amounts as demanded in
Ext.P6.
6. After paying the aforesaid amounts, it will be
open to the petitioner to approach the 4th respondent for
payment of any amount that may be due to the
petitioner towards refund of security deposit, welfare
fund etc.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE
ajt/acd
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3345/2015
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
P1- A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORITY
FOR APPOINTMENT AS AUTHORISED AGENT OF MPKBY
ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER DATED
01.01.1981.
P2- A TRUE COPY OF THE RENEWAL ORDER ISSUED BY
THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, CHITTUR DATED
20.12.2008, RENEWING THE AGENCY TILL
29.12.2011.
P3- A TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED
29.12.2008 EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER WITH
THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA.
P4- A TRUE COPY OF THE STANDARD FORM ASL AAS.6
ISSUED FROM THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICE TO
MPKBY AGENTS.
P5- A LETTER DATED 17.12.2009 ISSUED BY THE
BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, CHITTUR BLOCK TO
THE PETITIONER INFORMING HER TERMINATING HER
AGENCY.
P6- A TRUE COPY OF LETTER DT. 8.4.14 ISSUED BY
THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, CHITTUR.
P7- A LETTER DATED 14.10.2014 ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONER BY THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
CHITTUR.
P8- A DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY DEPUTY TAHSILDAR,
REVENUE RECOVERY, CHITTUR U/S OF THE R.R ACT
TO THE PETITIONER DATED 31.12.2014.
P9- A DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY DEPUTY TAHSILDAR,
REVENUE RECOVERY, CHITTUR U/S 34 OF THE
REVENUE RECOVERY ACT DATED 31.12.2014.
