Bangkok Legal Service

Article 6: Mr. Neung and Mr. Song, while holding positions as Provincial Officers, who possessed the authority to collect taxes and fees, took advantage of an opportunity arising from fraudulent conduct by misappropriating tax and fee funds collected for their personal benefit, totaling 4,000,000 baht. The agency subsequently initiated an investigation for violation with deliberate intent. The head of the agency issued an order on 2547, instructing Mr. Neung and Mr. Song to return 2547 baht, which was a period of time following Mr. Neung’s resignation from the service, and Mr. Neung disregarded this order and failed to pay the amount as directed. On April 1, 2547, he died before receiving the order, occurring on the 3rd. The agency will then seek to recover the funds from Mr. Neung and Mr. Song through any means.

The fact that Mr. Neung and Mr. Song deliberately misappropriated tax and fee funds for their personal benefit constitutes a case of jointly committing a violation by the officials, causing damage to the administrative agency to which they belonged. The head of the administrative agency has the power to issue an order requiring officials who committed administrative violations within a specified period, as stipulated in the Royal Decree on Administrative Operations. Even if an official has ceased to be an official, Section 8, 10, and 12 of the Public Officers Act B.E. 2539, or has died before the administrative agency can hold them liable for the consequences of the violation they jointly committed, the official remains liable for the effects of the violation.

As the situation presented, the head of the administrative agency, as the aggrieved party, instructed Mr. Neung to pay the amount to the administrative agency within the period after receiving the order, but he disregarded it. If the administrative agency fails to issue a warning to Mr. Neung, the warning must be at least seven days long. If Mr. Neung still disregards and fails to comply with the warning, the administrative agency must take coercive administrative measures and conduct a public auction to collect the funds for the agency, as stipulated in the Royal Decree on Administrative Operations.

Regarding Mr. Neung, the administrative agency cannot file a lawsuit against him in the Administrative Court to seek a compulsory remedy for grievances, as there is no legal provision specifying the steps or procedures for resolving grievances. The Administrative Court and Administrative Litigation Court Act B.E. 2542, Section 42 and Section has been established.

For the case of Mr. Song, it appears that Mr. Song had died before the administrative agency issued an order to demand payment of the funds. This is in accordance with Section 57 of the Royal Decree on Administrative Operations B.E. 2539. If the administrative agency intends to recover the funds, it will conduct an investigation to determine that at the time Mr. Song died, the estate was given to the administrative agency to notify the heirs or the administrator of Mr. Song’s estate, as mentioned above, to pay the funds to the administrative agency. If the heirs or the administrator of the estate disregard this, the administrative agency must file a lawsuit against the heirs to have the court order the heirs or the administrator of Mr. Song’s estate to pay the funds to the Administrative Court for Mr. Song.