Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

JOSE M.D., HEAD MASTER versus THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


JOSE M.D., HEAD MASTER v. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER - WP(C) No. 23752 of 2004(C) [2007] RD-KL 255 (4 January 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 23752 of 2004(C)

1. JOSE M.D., HEAD MASTER,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
... Respondent

2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (EDUCATION)

3. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS,

For Petitioner :SRI.K.B.GANGESH

For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

Dated :04/01/2007

O R D E R

S. SIRI JAGAN, J.

```````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P. (C) No. 23752 OF 2004 C ````````````````````````````````````````````````````

Dated this the 4th day of January, 2007



J U D G M E N T

The petitioner's grievance in this writ petition is against the audit objection communicated to the petitioner by Ext.P1 and directing him to forward the proposal for regularisation of pay pursuant to the audit objection. The petitioner submits that the audit objection and consequently Ext.P1 is not sustainable. He has also given specific reasons as to why audit objection is not sustainable. The 1st respondent has filed a counter affidavit supporting the audit objection. However, I am of opinion that I am not called upon to decide that question on merits now since no proceedings for fixation of pay or recovery of excess amounts drawn by the petitioner can be initiated based on the audit objection alone. Under law, the audit objection has to be followed by a show cause notice to the petitioner, a hearing and a final order either confirming or waiving the audit objection. Unless and until such an order is passed the respondents cannot implement the audit objection. In the above circumstances, I dispose of the writ petition declaring that the audit objection forwarded to the petitioner by Ext.P1 communication shall not be implemented unless and until the petitioner is given a show cause notice giving opportunity to show cause why the audit objection should not be implemented and passing a final order considering his objections affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner.

(S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE)

aks


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.