The State Of Karnataka Rep By Its ... vs Annapoorna
2023 Latest Caselaw 6216 Kant

                                              -1-
                                                NC: 2023:KHC-D:9806-DB
                                                      WP No. 101384 of 2022




                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
                                       DHARWAD BENCH

                           DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2023

                                           PRESENT
                        THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR
                                              AND
                            THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
                          WRIT PETITION NO. 101384 OF 2022 (S-KAT)
                   BETWEEN:

                   1.   THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
                        REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
                        EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
                        M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU,

                   2.   THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
                        PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS KOPPAL,

                   3.   THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER,
                        KUSTAGI TALUK KOPPAL DISTRICT

                                                          ...PETITIONERS
ROHAN              (BY SRI G.K.HIREGOUDAR, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
HADIMANI
T
                   AND:
Digitally signed
by ROHAN
HADIMANI T
                        SMT S. ANNAPOORNA,
Date:
2023.09.02              AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
12:30:59 -0700
                        W/O.SRI SATHYAPPA MADIVALARA,
                        WORKING AS ASSISTANT TEACHER,
                        KORADAKERA, KUSHTAGI,
                        KOPPAL DISTRICT
                        R/AT KUSHTAGI-583 277
                                                             ...RESPONDENT
                          (BY SRI PRASHANT S. KADADEVAR, ADVOCATE)
                               -2-
                                NC: 2023:KHC-D:9806-DB
                                        WP No. 101384 of 2022




     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE
A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA
STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BELAGAVI BENCH IN
APPLICATION NO.655/2019 BY ORDER DATED 10.03.2020
VIDE ANNEXURE-A.

    THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                            ORDER

This petition by the State is directed against the

impugned order dated 10.03.2020 passed in Application

No.655/2019 by the Karnataka State Administrative

Tribunal, Belagavi (for short, 'the Tribunal'), whereby the

said application filed by the respondent challenging the

memorandum dated 09.08.2018 and notice dated

17.09.2018 purporting the recovery of alleged access

salary of Rs.2,10,480/- from the respondent was allowed

by the Tribunal.

2. A perusal of the material on record will indicate

that the respondent having been appointed as an Assistant

Teacher in the Government Higher Primary School and

was promoted to the post of Headmaster on 25.04.2006.

NC: 2023:KHC-D:9806-DB WP No. 101384 of 2022

However, subsequently she was reverted to the post of

Assistant Teacher, despite which the petitioner/State

continuing to pay her five stagnation increments from

2013 to 2018, which was sought to be recovered from the

respondent. Aggrieved by the demand made by the

petitioner/State to recover the stagnation increments said

to have been paid illegally by them in favour of her, she

approached the Tribunal, which allowed the application by

placing reliance upon of the Judgment of Hon'ble Apex

Court in the case of State of Punjab Vs. Rafiq Masih

(White Washer) reported in (2015)4 SCC 334, which was

followed by this Court in the case of Ganjigere

Gullegouda Javaregouda Vs. Hubli-Dharwad Municipal

Corporation, Dharwad and Others, reported in 2018(4)

AKR 767, wherein it is held that even illegal payments

made by the petitioner/State cannot be recovered in

respect of Group-C and D employees. It is undisputed fact

that the petitioner is a Group-C employee and

consequently, the Tribunal was fully justified in placing

NC: 2023:KHC-D:9806-DB WP No. 101384 of 2022

reliance upon the aforesaid Judgments and allowing the

application by holding as under:

"ORDER

(i) Application is allowed and notices both bearing No. C4 : Pra.Sha.He.Vee : Ma.Paa : 34 : 18- 19 dated 9.8.2018 and 17.9.2018 (Annexures-A4 &

5) both issued by the 3rd respondent are set aside.

(ii) However, it is clarified that the applicant is not entitled for any salary based on the stagnation increments which were extended to her from July 2013 onwards."

3. Upon re-appreciation and re-evaluation of the

entire material on record, we do not find any illegality or

infirmity in the impugned order dated 10.03.2020 passed

by the Tribunal. Accordingly, petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

CKK