J U D G M E N T

Alexander Thomas, J.

The respondents herein have preferred the instant Ext.P1 Original Application OA No.350/2017 before the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram Bench, with the following prayers:

“(i) To call for the records leading to Annexure A10 and quash the same.

(ii) To issue direction to the respondents to release the entire amount fo DCRG due to the applicant as per Annexure A1 forthwith.

(iii) To direct the respondents 1 and 2 to pay 12% interest till the DCRG amount is disbursed to the applicant.

(iv) To issue such other orders or directions as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

2. The Tribunal after hearing both sides has rendered the impugned Ext.P7 final order on 02.12.2019, finally disposing of the said OA No.350/2017. That it is clear from the admitted pleadings and materials on record that the alleged liabilities has turned out to be nil liabilities and hence the respondents in the OA are now obliged to pay interest at the rate of 7% on the belated payment of DCRG, (Death Cum Retirement Gratuity), for the period from 08.07.2014 to the date of actual payment. It is this final verdict of the Tribunal at Ext.P7 in the above said OA that is under challenge in the instant Original Petition filed at the behest of the Director of Public Instructions and the other Departmental Officials concerned of the Education Department. The prayers in the instant Original Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India are as follows:

“1. To set aside the Ext.P7 order of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal in OA No.350/2017.

2. To dismiss the Ext.P1 Original Application No.350/2017 filed by the Respondent before the KAT.

3. To declare that the Respondent is not eligible to get the interest jat the rate of 7% awarded by the Tribunal in Ext.P7 order.

4. Any other order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

3. Heard Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the petitioners in the OP/respondents in the OA and Sri.P.Nandakumar, learned Counsel appearing for the sole respondent in the OP/legal heir of the diseased applicant in the OA. The instant OA was filed by the diseased husband of the sole respondent herein. It appears that after the rendering of the impugned Ext.P7 verdict, the Original Applicant has died and hence his widow, as the legal heirs of the diseased Original Applicant, has been impleaded in this OP as the respondents herein (widow and children who are the legal heirs of the diseased Original Applicant). Hence, his widow and his children, who are his legal representatives have been arrayed as respondents in this OP. For the sake of convenience, the diseased pensioner will be referred for short as the Original Applicant. 4. The Original Applicant retired from service as Senior Superintendent from the Education Department of the Government of Kerala on 31.12.2013. The payment of DCRG due to him was delayed by the Departmental Authorities citing the ground of liability fixation process. Hence, the Original Applicant had voluntarily submitted and executed an indemnity bond, as conceived in Rule 116 of the KSR Part III for release of the DCRG. The said plea for release of DCRG, in spite of execution of indemnity bond by the applicant was refused by the Departmental authorities concerned. It appears that R2 in the OA, (Deputy Director of Education) had initially issued Annexure A5 and Annexure A6 notices, both dated 27.01.2016 to the applicant regarding certain liabilities proposed to be fixed against him. Thereafter R2 in the OA has issued Annexures A7 and A8 orders, both dated 23.03.2016, fixing and directing certain liabilities on different Officers, including the Applicant. It is after this process that R1 in the OA (DPI) has issued Annexure A10 dated 29.11.2016 styling it as a liability certificate, alleging that the total liability fixed