Monday, 01, Jun, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

The State Of Karnataka vs Shri Shivashankargouda S/O ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 18582 Kant

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 18582 Kant
Judgement Date : 25 July, 2024

Karnataka High Court

The State Of Karnataka vs Shri Shivashankargouda S/O ... on 25 July, 2024

Author: S.G.Pandit

Bench: S.G.Pandit

                                              -1-
                                                     NC: 2024:KHC-D:10524-DB
                                                       WA No.100280 of 2024




                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
                                      DHARWAD BENCH
                           DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JULY, 2024
                                           PRESENT
                            THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S G PANDIT
                                             AND
                           THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
                            WRIT APPEAL NO.100280 OF 2024 (S-RES)
                BETWEEN:
                1.   THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
                     R/BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
                     DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
                     BANGALORE-560001.

                2.   THE COMMISSIONER OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION
                     DEPARTMENT OF COLLEGE EDUCATION,
                     PALACE ROAD, BENGALURU 560001.

                3.   THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION
                     DEPARTMENT OF COLLEGE EDUCATION,
                     PALACE ROAD, BENGALURU 560001.

                4.   THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A & E)
                     AMBEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU-560001.

Digitally signed by                                             ...APPELLANTS
VINAYAKA B V        (BY SRI. MADANMOHAN M. KHANNUR, AGA)
Location: HIGH
COURT OF            AND:
KARNATAKA
                1.   SHRI SHIVASHANKARGOUDA
                     S/O TIMMANAGOUDA PATIL
                     AGE. 63 YEARS, OCC. RETIRED SDA,
                     R/O. H.NO.64, WARD NO.10,
                     GADDANKERI CROSS, POST. BAGALKOT,
                     TQ AND DIST. BAGALKOT 587102.

                2.   THE PRINCIPAL OF BVVS POLYTECHNICAL COLLEGE
                     BAGALKOT, PIN CODE 587101.
                                                             ...RESPONDENTS
                                 -2-
                                         NC: 2024:KHC-D:10524-DB
                                           WA No.100280 of 2024




     THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S.4 OF KARNATAKA HIGH
COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO, SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER
DATED. 13-09-2023 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF
THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP NO.105188/2022 (S-RES) AND
DISMISS THE PETITION WITH COSTS IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE
AND EQUITY.

      THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS
DAY, S G PANDIT J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
                     AND
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G. BASAVARAJA


                        ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE S.G.PANDIT)

This intra-Court appeal is directed against the order dated

13.09.2023 passed in Writ Petition No.105188/2022, whereby

the writ petition of respondent No.1 herein was allowed

quashing recovery under order dated 10.02.2022 with a

direction to refund the recovered amount with interest at 6%

per annum.

2. Heard Sri.M.M.Khannur, learned AGA for the

appellants and perused writ appeal papers.

3. Learned AGA would submit that respondent No.1-

petitioner was working as Typist-cum-Second Division Assistant

in respondent No.2-Institution having been appointed on

25.03.1985 and retired from service on attaining the age of

NC: 2024:KHC-D:10524-DB

superannuation on 31.05.2021. It is the case of the appellants

that the petitioner was granted certain increments on

25.01.2001 and he was paid excess pay during the period from

2001 to 2007 which he was not entitled to. It is also submitted

that the respondent No.1-petitioner has executed an affidavit

agreeing/consenting to recover the excess pay of Rs.5,47,807/-

out of the DCRG/pensionary benefits. It is submitted that the

petitioner was not entitled for increment in the year 2001. The

excess payment of salary is made during 2001 to 2007 and the

excess paid salary was ordered to be recovered from the

pensionary benefit of the respondent No.1-petitioner. Thus,

learned AGA justifies the action of the appellants-respondents.

4. Having heard the learned AGA and on perusal of the

writ appeal papers, we are of the view that no ground is made

out to interfere with the impugned learned Single Judge's order

quashing the recovery.

5. Respondent No.1, the petitioner before the learned

Single Judge retired from service on attaining the age of

superannuation on 31.05.2021. Respondent No.1-petitioner

was working in respondent No.2-Institution as Typist-cum-

NC: 2024:KHC-D:10524-DB

Second Division Assistant. It is also admitted fact that in the

year 2001, the petitioner was granted increment for which the

petitioner was not entitled to. The appellant-respondent

authorities passed order dated 10.02.2022 (Annexure-L) in

which the petitioner's entitlement for pension and pensionary

benefit was determined and in the same order it was ordered to

recover a sum of Rs.5,47,807/- from the petitioner's

pensionary benefit on the ground that the petitioner is paid

excess salary during the period 2001 to 2007. The action of the

appellants-respondents is wholly arbitrary and opposed to the

principles of natural justice. No notice whatsoever issued to the

petitioner before passing order of recovery and moreover, it is

seen that the appellants-respondent authorities have failed to

determine the amount after affording an opportunity to the

petitioner. Though it is the case of the appellants-respondent

authorities that excess payment was paid to the petitioner

during the year from 2001 to 2007, no action is taken against

the petitioner till his retirement in the year 2021.

6. The petitioner belongs to Group-C Cadre. The

Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab v. Rafiq

NC: 2024:KHC-D:10524-DB

Masih1 on which the learned Single Judge has placed reliance,

makes it clear that no recovery order could be issued to the

retired officials that too belonging to Class-III and Class-IV

services i.e.Group-C and Group-D services. Such recovery from

retired employees that too belonging to Group-C and Group-D

would be iniquitous or harsh or arbitrary.

7. Learned AGA placed reliance on the affidavit

executed by respondent No.1-petitioner consenting to recovery

of sum of Rs.5,47,807/- from his pensionary benefits. The said

affidavit is dated 10.02.2022. The impugned order is also dated

10.02.2022. The petitioner retired from service on 31.05.2021.

For nearly one year the petitioner's pensionary benefits was not

settled. In that circumstance, the petitioner had no choice but

to give such unconscionable affidavit. Such an affidavit taken

by the appellants-respondent authorities to settle pensionary

benefits of the petitioner is nothing but exploitation and

harassment to the pensioners. There is no merit in the writ

appeal and accordingly, stands rejected.

(2015) 4 SCC 334

NC: 2024:KHC-D:10524-DB

8. In view of dismissal of the writ appeal, six weeks'

time is granted to the appellant-State Government to comply

the order under appeal dated 13.09.2023 passed in

W.P.No.105188/2022.

9. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, does not

survive for consideration and are disposed off.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

RH

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter