Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 20525
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
HARISANKAR V. MENON, J
THE DIRECTOR OF LOCAL FUND AUDIT, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF LOCAL FUND AUDIT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – Appellant
Versus
K. S. VALSAMMA, D/O KAMALAKSHI AMMA – Respondent
WP(C) NO.36108 OF 2023
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Smt.S.L.Sylaja
For the Respondents: Sri.Jithin Saji Isaac, Shri.K.J.Saji Isaac, Dr.Elizabeth Varkey
The petitioners must appeal according to statutory provisions after the lower court's order.
Headnote:The writ petition was filed to challenge the order of the Additional District Court - III, Manjeri, which set aside the surcharge certificate in favor of the respondent. The court found that petitioners should prefer a statutory appeal under Section 215(13) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. Without prejudice, the writ petition was dismissed, allowing the petitioners to pursue their rights through appeal.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to surcharge certificate. (Para 2) |
| 2. need for statutory appeal under act. (Para 3) |
| 3. writ petition dismissed with appeal rights. (Para 4) |
JUDGMENT
Heard Smt.S.L.Sylaja, learned Government Pleader for the petitioners, as well as Sri.Jithin Saji Isaac, learned counsel for the respondent herein.
2. The petitioners have filed the captioned writ petition, seeking to challenge the order passed by the Additional District Court - III, Manjeri, setting aside the surcharge certificate in an original petition filed by the respondent herein.
3. The learned counsel for the respondent has pointed out with reference to the principles laid down by this Court in Mariamma Joseph v. Director of Local Fund Audit [2025 KHC 1982], that as against the orders in the nature of the one impugned herein, the remedy of the petitioners is to prefer a statutory appeal under the provisions of Section 215 (13) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act , 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').
4. In the light of the above, it is for the petitioners to institute an appropriate appeal as prescribed under Section 215 (13) of the Act.
In such circumstances, without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to prefer an appeal under Section 215 (13) of the Act, this writ petition would stand dismissed.
