THE STATE OF KARNATAKA v. THE COMMISSIONER

(BY SRI DYAVAIAH T., ADVOCATE) …RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET- ASIDE THE IMPUGNED FINAL ORDER DATED 03/03/2023 PASSED IN APPLICATION No.558/2020 BY THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND THE SAME AS PERVERSE AND ILLEGAL. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) The State and its authorities from Agriculture Department are before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, aggrieved by order dated 03.03.2022 in Application No.558/2020 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:9991-DB WP No. 10947 of 2024 HC-KAR Tribunal, Bengaluru (for short 'the Tribunal') allowing the application of respondent with a direction to the petitioners' herein to sanction DCRG and commutation value of pension to the respondent and interest on the belated payment of pension in accordance with rules within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.

Heard learned Additional Government Advocate Sri. Vikas Rojipura for the petitioners and learned counsel Sri. T. Dyavaiah, for respondent. Perused the writ petition papers.

Brief facts of the case are that, the respondent was working as Assistant Director of Agriculture and retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.10.2018. As on the date of superannuation of the respondent, there were no departmental proceedings or criminal proceedings that were contemplated or initiated or commenced against respondent. Only on the ground that there are certain audit objections raised during the period in which the petitioner was working as Assistant Director of Agriculture, Kollegala, the Pensionary and retirement benefit of the respondent was not settled. As the 4th petitioner's communication dated - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:9991-DB WP No. 10947 of 2024 HC-KAR

05.12.2019 indicated withholding of entire retirement benefit for want of LPC/NDC clarification, the respondent approached the Tribunal in application No.558/2020 to quash the portion of communication dated 05.12.2019 (Annexure-A7) whereunder, it was intimated that DCRG is withheld for want of LPC/LDC and with a prayer to direct to the petitioners' to release and pay the withheld DCRG and commuted value of pension along with interest for belated payment of pensionay benefits in terms of the Government Order. The Tribunal under impugned order dated 03.03.2023 passed the following order: "The application is allowed and a direction is issued to the respondents to sanction DCRG, commuted value of pension to the applicant and interest on belated payment of pension in accordance with rules, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. "

Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners-state authorities are before this Court in this writ petition contending that there are certain allegations against the petitioner on the implementation of works MGNREGA during the year 2009-10 and that investigation in that respect is ordered. It is also contended that the respondent has also committed financial - 5 - NC: 2026:KHC:9991-DB WP No. 10947 of 2024 HC-KAR impropriety in a sum of Rs.4,96,51,227/- and there is audit objection to an amount of Rs.5,22,80,965/-.

When the matter was taken up for hearing today, learned AGA Sri. Vikas Rojipura filed memo dated 18.02.2026 enclosing Government Order dated 17.02.2026, whereunder, the State has taken a decision to withdraw the above writ petition. The reason assigned for withdrawal of the writ petition reads as follows:

30.08.2023 gÀAzÀÄ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ "ªÉÄÃ¯É NzÀ¯ÁzÀ PÀæªÀÄ ¸ÀASÉå(14) gÀ°è ªÀiÁ£Àå PÉJn Cfð ¸ÀASÉå:558/2020gÀ wÃ¥ÀÄð ¢£ÁAPÀ: 03.03.2023 PÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ðAiÀĪÀgÀ ¢£ÁAPÀ CzsÀåPÀëvÉAiÀÄ°è dgÀÄVzÀ «ªÁzÀ ¥ÀjºÁgÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄ ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ°è ²æà f. J¸ï. EAzÀÆzsÀgÀ ªÀÄÆwð, ¤ªÀÈvÀÛ ¸ÀºÁAiÀÄPÀ PÀȶ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ, PÀȶ E¯ÁSÉ EªÀgÀ ªÉÄð£À DAvÀjPÀ ¯ÉPÀÌ vÀ¥Á¸ÀuÁ ªÀgÀ¢ C£ÀĸÁgÀ DPÉëÃ¥ÀuÁ ªÉÆvÀÛ ªÀ¸ÀƯÁwUÉ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ ¤ªÀÈvÀÛ C¢üPÁjAiÀÄ «gÀÄzÀÞ Senior Civil and JMFC £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄ PÉƼÉîÃUÁ® E°è ¹«¯ï zÁªÉ zÁR¯ÁVgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ, ªÀiÁ£Àå £ÁåAiÀÄ ªÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄÄ ¢£ÁAPÀ:03.03.2023 gÀAzÀÄ ¤ÃrgÀĪÀ DzÉñÀzÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ ªÀiÁ£Àå GZÀÑ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ°è ªÉÄîä£À« ¸À°è¸À®Ä ¤tð¬Ä¸À¯ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. ªÉÄÃ¯É NzÀ¯ÁzÀ PÀæªÀÄ ¸ÀASÉå (15) gÀ°è «ªÁzÀ ¥ÀjºÁgÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½ ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ ¤tðAiÀÄzÀAvÉ ªÀiÁ£Àå PÀ£ÁðlPÀ gÁdå DqÀ½vÀ £ÁåAiÀÄ ªÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄ Cfð ¸ÀASÉå: 558/2020, ¢£ÁAPÀ: 03.03.2023 gÀ DzÉñÀzÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ ªÉÄîä£À«AiÀÄ£ÀÄß ªÀiÁ£Àå PÀ£ÁðlPÀ GZÀÑ £ÁåAiÀÄ®AiÀÄ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ E°è jmï Cfð ¸ÀASÉå:10947/2024 zÁR°¸À¯ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. ªÉÄÃ¯É NzÀ¯ÁzÀ PÀæªÀÄ ¸ÀASÉå (16) gÀ°è ¸ÀPÁðj ªÀQîgÀ ¥ÀvÀæ ¢£ÁAPÀ:16.02.2026 gÀ°è ²æà f.

J¸ï. EAzÀÆzsÀgÀ ªÀÄÆwð, ¤ªÀÈvÀÛ ¸ÀºÁAiÀÄPÀ PÀȶ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ, PÀȶ E¯ÁSÉ EªÀgÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ ¸ÀPÁðgÀªÀÅ ªÀiÁ£Àå GZÀÑ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ°è zÁR°¹zÀÝ jmï C¦Ã®Ä ¸ÀASÉå - 6 - NC: 2026:KHC:9991-DB WP No. 10947 of 2024 HC-KAR 10947/2024 gÀ «ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄÄ ªÀiÁ£Àå £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ°è ¢£ÁAPÀ 16.02.2026 gÀAzÀÄ «ZÁgÀuÉUÉ §A¢gÀÄvÀÛzÉ. ¸ÀzÀj ¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ «ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄ ¸ÀAzÀ¨sÀðzÀ°è ªÀiÁ£Àå £ÁåAiÀÄ ¦ÃoÀªÀÅ PÀ£ÁðlPÀ DqÀ½vÀ £ÁåAiÀĪÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄÄ Cfð ¸ÀASÉå 558/2020 gÀ wæð£À°è GzÀÞj¹gÀĪÀ CA±ÀUÀ¼ÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ ªÀiÁ£Àå £ÁåAiÀĪÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄÄ vÀ£Àß DzÉñÀPÉÌ ¥ÀjUÀt¸À¯ÁzÀ ¥ÀÆgÀPÀ CA±ÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¥ÀjUÀt¸ÀzÉà ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÀzÀj ¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ°è ¸ÀPÁðj ªÀQîgÀÄ ¸ÀzÀj wæð£À «gÀÄzÀÞ ªÉÄîä£À« ¸À°è¸À®Ä ¸ÀzÀj ¥ÀæPÀgÀtªÀÅ ¸ÀÆPÀÛªÁzÀÄzÀ®è JA§ C©ü¥ÁæAiÀĪÀ£ÀÄß ¥ÀjUÀt¸ÀzÉà ¸ÀPÁðgÀªÀÅ ªÉÄîä£À« ¸À°è¸À®Ä C£ÀĸÀj¸À¯ÁzÀ ªÀiÁ£ÀzÀAqÀUÀ¼ÀÄ C¸ÀªÀÄxÀð¤ÃAiÀĪÁVzÉ JAzÀÄ «ZÁgÀuÉ ªÉÃ¼É C©ü¥ÁæAiÀÄ¥ÀnÖgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. ¸ÀzÀj ¤ªÀÈvÀÛ C¢üPÁjAiÀÄ «gÀÄzÀÞ AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà E¯ÁSÁ/£Áå¬ÄPÀ «ZÁgÀuÉ eÁjAiÀÄ°è®è¢zÀÝgÀÆ ¸ÀºÀ PÀ£ÁðlPÀ £ÁUÀjÃPÀ ¸ÉêÁ ¤AiÀĪÀiÁªÀ½UÀ¼ÀÄ 1958 gÀ ¤AiÀĪÀÄ 214 (J) gÀ£ÀéAiÀÄ ¦AZÀt ¸Ë®¨s Àå vÀqÉ»r¢gÀĪÀÅzÀÄ ¤AiÀĪÀÄUÀ½UÉ «gÀÄzÀÞªÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. DzÀÄzÀjAzÀ, ²æà EAzÀÆzsÀgÀ ªÀÄÆwð EªÀgÀ ¤ªÀÈwÛ ªÉÃvÀ£ÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß vÀqÉ»r¢gÀĪÀÅzÀPÉÌ, ¸ÀªÀÄxÀð¤ÃAiÀÄ PÁgÀtUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ªÀÄÄA¢£À «ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄ ¢£ÁAPÀ:18.02.2026 gÉƼÀUÁV ªÀiÁ£Àå £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄPÉÌ ¸À°è¸ÀĪÀAvÉ w½¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. ¥ÀæPÀgÀtPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ ¸ÀPÁðj ªÀQîgÀ ¥ÀvÀæ ¢£ÁAPÀ:16.2.2026 gÀ°è£À CA±ÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß PÀÆ®APÀµÀªÁV ¥Àj²Ã°¸À¯ÁV, ²æà EAzÀÆzsÀgÀ ªÀÄÆwð, ¤ªÀÈvÀÛ ¸ÀºÁAiÀÄPÀ PÀȶ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ, EªÀgÀÄ F »AzÉ, d¯Á£ÀAiÀÄ£À C©üªÀÈ¢Þ C¢üPÁjAiÀiÁV MGNREGA AiÉÆÃd£ÉAiÀÄ PÁªÀÄUÁjUÉ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ 2009-10 jAzÀ 2012-13£É ¸Á°£ÀªÀgÉV£À DAvÀjPÀ ¯ÉPÀÌ vÀ¥Á¸ÀuÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ªÀÄÄRå ¯ÉPÁÌ¢üPÁj, f¯Áè ¥ÀAZÁAiÀÄvï, ZÁªÀÄgÁd£ÀUÀgÀ EªÀgÀÄ ¢£ÁAPÀ:20.01.2014 jAzÀ 07.03.2014 gÀªÀgÉUÉ PÉÊUÉÆArzÀÄÝ, CAvÀjPÀ ¯ÉPÀÌvÀ¥Á¸ÀuÉ £ÀqÉzÀ 02 ªÀµÀðUÀ¼À vÀgÀĪÁAiÀÄ, ¸ÀzÀj ¯ÉPÀÌ vÀ¥Á¸ÀuÁ ªÀgÀ¢UÉ C£ÀÄ¥Á®£Á ªÀgÀ¢ ¸À°è¸ÀĪÀAvÉ ¥ÀAZÁAiÀÄvï, ¯ÉPÁÌ¢üPÁjUÀ¼ÀÄ, ZÁªÀÄgÁd£ÀUÀgÀ EªÀgÀÄ ¢£ÁAPÀ:05.11.2016gÀ°è PÀȶ C¢üPÁj / AiÉÆÃd£Á C£ÀĵÁ×£Á¢üPÁj, d¯Á£ÀAiÀÄ£À C©üªÀÈ¢Þ E¯ÁSÉ, PÉƼÉîUÁ® EªÀjUÉ ¥ÀvÀæ ªÀåªÀºÁgÀ £ÀqɹgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. ²æà EAzÀÆzsÀgÀ ªÀÄÆwð EªÀgÀÄ ¢£ÁAPÀ:31.10.2018 gÀ°è ¸ÀPÁðj ¸ÉêɬÄAzÀ ªÀAiÉÆäªÀÈwÛ ºÉÆA¢gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. ¸ÀzÀjAiÀĪÀgÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ ¤UÀ¢üvÀ CªÀ¢üAiÀÄ°è ²¸ÀÄÛPÀæªÀÄ PÉÊUÉƼÀÄîªÀ°è GAmÁVgÀĪÀ PÁAiÀÄð«zsÁ£ÀzÀ ¯ÉÆÃ¥ÀUÀ¼À »£É߯ÉAiÀÄ°è, ªÀiÁ£Àå PÀ£ÁðlPÀ GZÀÑ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ°è zÁR°¹gÀĪÀ jmï Cfð ¸ÀASÉå 10947/2024£ÀÄß »A¥ÀqÉAiÀÄ®Ä ¸ÀPÁðgÀªÀÅ wêÀiÁð¤¹, F PɼÀPÀAqÀAvÉ DzÉò¹zÉ." ªÀÄÄRå f¯Áè - 7 - NC: 2026:KHC:9991-DB WP No. 10947 of 2024 HC-KAR

The reading of the above makes it clear that, the State was aware of the legal position and yet choose to file this writ petition. Prima facie, it appears that filing of writ petition is only to harass the petitioner. It is the duty and responsibility of the State to minimize the litigation and not to encourage the litigation. The State shall also not indulge in frivolous litigation.

Be that as it may, as on the date of filing the writ petition and as on the date of taking decision to file writ petition, the State was aware of the legal position and the State was having the opinion and legal advice of its legal officers including the Government Advocate, as could be seen from the preamble of the Government Order taking decision to withdraw the writ petition. Despite the legal position and in the absence of initiating Departmental Enquiry to determine the alleged financial impropriety, the petitioners' authorities could not have withheld the DCRG, that too, after the direction of the Tribunal.

It is a settled position of law that, audit objections, by itself, cannot be a sufficient ground to pass any adverse order, in the absence of any enquiry being conducted, as it - 8 - NC: 2026:KHC:9991-DB WP No. 10947 of 2024 HC-KAR would be in violation of principles of natural justice. The Hon’ble Apex Court in State of Bihar and Ors. V. Industrial Corporation (P) Ltd. and Ors. reported in (2003) 11 SCC 465 has held as under: “16. In the present case, what we find is that before creating a demand of penal duty or penalty, there was no adjudication by any authority as regards the breach committed by the respondents. We also find that no opportunity of any kind was offered to the respondents before the demand as regards the penal duty was pressed against the respondents. The matter was not even examined as to what was the reason for shortfall in the production of rectified spirit. The Molasses Act does not provide for imposition of such penalty in the event of shortfall of spirit. It must, therefore, necessarily be held that the imposition of the impugned penalty being against the principles of natural justice is illegal and void.

18. The statutory authorities also could not have sought to levy penalty relying on or on the basis of the audit report only. They were required to apply their own independent mind for the purpose of finding out as to whether the respondents in law had committed any breach of the terms and conditions of the licence or the provisions of the 1947 or 1915 Act - 9 - NC: 2026:KHC:9991-DB WP No. 10947 of 2024 HC-KAR so as to make them liable for levy of penalty. The authorities concerned acting in terms of the statutory provisions, therefore, without further investigation could not have acted mechanically on the audit report.”

When we questioned the learned AGA as to who has taken the decision to file the writ petition, in the above circumstance, learned AGA produced a memo along with proceedings. The proceedings dated 30.08.2023 were taken by Dispute Resolution Board [for short 'the Board], which consisted of the following eight members. "1.

5. ²æà «.C£ÀÄâPÀĪÀiÁgï, ¨sÁ.D.¸ÉÃ., ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð, PÀȶ E¯ÁSÉ. ²æà ªÉÊ.J¸ï.¥Ánïï, ¨sÁ.D.¸ÉÃ. DAiÀÄÄPÀÛgÀÄ, PÀȶ E¯ÁSÉ ²æà VjÃ±ï ºÉZï.¹, ¨sÁ.C.¸ÉÃ., DAiÀÄÄPÀÛgÀÄ, d¯Á£ÀAiÀÄ£À C©üªÀÈ¢Þ E¯ÁSÉ ²æà ZÀAzÀæ±ÉÃRgÀAiÀÄå ºÉZï.f, dAn ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ (DqÀ½vÀ) PÀȶ E¯ÁSÉ. ²æà ©. ¢°Ã¥ï PÀĪÀiÁgï ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ G¥À PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð (C©ü¥ÁæAiÀÄ-1) PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ E¯ÁSÉ

6. ²æà zÁPÁë¬Ät f.PÉ., PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ PÉÆñÀzÀ ªÀÄÄRå¸ÀÜgÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ - 10 - NC: 2026:KHC:9991-DB WP No. 10947 of 2024 HC-KAR ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ G¥ÀPÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð, ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ, PÀȶ vÉÆÃlUÁjPÉ, gÉõÉä ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¥À±ÀĸÀAUÉÆÃ¥À£É E¯ÁSÉ

8. ²æà PÉ.©.¥ÀæPÁ±ï, ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ G¥À PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð-2, PÀȶ E¯ÁSÉ ²æà C©zï.J¸ï.J¸ï. dAn PÀȶ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ, ZÁªÀÄgÁd£ÀUÀgÀ"

The proceedings read as follows: - Cfð PÉ.J.n ¸ÀASÉå:558/2020 ²æà "ªÀiÁ£Àå f.J¸ï.EAzsÀÄzsÀgÀªÀÄÆwð, ¤ªÀÈvÀÛ ¸ÀºÁAiÀÄPÀ PÀȶ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ «gÀÄzÀÞ gÁdå ¸ÀPÁðgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ EvÀgÀgÀÄ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ°è ªÀiÁ£Àå PÀ£ÁðlPÀ gÁdå DqÀ½vÀ £ÁåAiÀĪÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄÄ ¢£ÁAPÀ: 03.03.2023gÀAzÀÄ ¤ÃrzÀ DzÉñÀzÀ PÀÄjvÀÄ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ðUÀ¼ÀÄ, PÀȶ E¯ÁSÉ EªÀgÀ CzsÀåPÀëvÉAiÀÄ°è ¢£ÁAPÀ:30.08.2023gÀAzÀÄ £ÀqÉzÀ «ªÁzÀ ¥ÀjºÁgÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½ ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ £ÀqÀªÀ½UÀ¼ÀÄ: ºÁdjzÀÝ ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀÄ "1.

5. ²æà «.C£ÀÄâPÀĪÀiÁgï, ¨sÁ.D.¸ÉÃ., ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð, PÀȶ E¯ÁSÉ. ²æà ªÉÊ.J¸ï.¥Ánïï, ¨sÁ.D.¸ÉÃ. DAiÀÄÄPÀÛgÀÄ, PÀȶ E¯ÁSÉ ²æà VjÃ±ï ºÉZï.¹, ¨sÁ.C.¸ÉÃ., DAiÀÄÄPÀÛgÀÄ, d¯Á£ÀAiÀÄ£À C©üªÀÈ¢Þ E¯ÁSÉ ²æà ZÀAzÀæ±ÉÃRgÀAiÀÄå ºÉZï.f, dAn ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ (DqÀ½vÀ) PÀȶ E¯ÁSÉ. ²æà ©. ¢°Ã¥ï PÀĪÀiÁgï ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ G¥À PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð (C©ü¥ÁæAiÀÄ-1) PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ E¯ÁSÉ - 11 - NC: 2026:KHC:9991-DB WP No. 10947 of 2024 HC-KAR

8. ²æà zÁPÁë¬Ät f.PÉ., PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ PÉÆñÀzÀ ªÀÄÄRå¸ÀÜgÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ G¥ÀPÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð, ¸ÀºÀPÁgÀ, PÀȶ vÉÆÃlUÁjPÉ, gÉõÉä ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¥À±ÀĸÀAUÉÆÃ¥À£É E¯ÁSÉ ²æà PÉ.©.¥ÀæPÁ±ï, ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ G¥À PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð-2, PÀȶ E¯ÁSÉ ²æà C©zï.J¸ï.J¸ï. dAn PÀȶ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ, ZÁªÀÄgÁd£ÀUÀgÀ ****** ¸À¨sÉUÉ J®ègÀ£ÀÆß ¸ÁéUÀw¸À¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ. ²æà f.J¸ï.EAzsÀÆzÀgÀªÀÄÆwð, ¸ÀºÁAiÀÄPÀ PÀȶ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ (¤ªÀÈvÀÛ) EªÀgÀÄ ªÀiÁ£Àå PÀ£ÁðlPÀ gÁdå DqÀ½vÀ £ÁåAiÀĪÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄ°è Cfð ¸ÀASÉå:558/2020 C£ÀÄß zÁR°¹ vÀªÀÄä ¤ªÀÈwÛ ¸Ë®¨sÀåUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ©qÀÄUÀqÉ ªÀiÁqÀĪÀAvÉ PÉÆÃjgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. F CfðUÉ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ ªÀiÁ£Àå £ÁåAiÀĪÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄÄ ¢£ÁAPÀ: 03.03.2023gÀAzÀÄ F PɼÀPÀAqÀAvÉ DzÉñÀ ¤ÃrgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. "....The application is allowed and a direction is issued to the respondents to sanction DCRG, commuted value of pension to the applicant and interest on belated payment of pension in accordance with rules, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order" ªÉÄîÌAqÀ ªÀiÁ£Àå PÉ.J.n DzÉñÀzÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ ªÀiÁ£Àå GZÀÑ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ°è ªÉÄîä£À« ¸À°è¸À®Ä CºÀð ¥ÀæPÀgÀtªÀ®èªÉAzÀÄ ¸ÀPÁðj ªÀQîgÀÄ, PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ PÉÆñÀzÀ ªÀÄÄRå¸ÀÜgÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ E¯ÁSÉAiÀÄÄ C©ü¥ÁæAiÀÄ ¤ÃrgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. PÀ£ÁðlPÀ £ÁåAiÀĪÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄÄ ªÀiÁ£Àå ¢£ÁAPÀ:03.03.2023gÀAzÀÄ ¤ÃrgÀĪÀ DzÉñÀzÀ PÀÄjvÀÄ «ªÁzÀ ¥ÀjºÁgÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄ ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ°è ZÀað¸À¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ. DqÀ½vÀ gÁdå - 12 - NC: 2026:KHC:9991-DB WP No.

10947 of 2024 HC-KAR ¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ°è ªÁådå ¤ªÀðºÀuÁ¢üPÁjAiÀĪÀgÁzÀ dAn PÀȶ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ, ZÁªÀÄgÁd£ÀUÀgÀ EªÀgÀÄ ²æà f.J¸ï.EAzsÀÆzÀgÀªÀÄÆwð, (¤ªÀÈvÀÛ) ¸ÀºÁAiÀÄPÀ PÀȶ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ, PÀȶ C¢üPÁjAiÀiÁV F »AzÉ d¯Á£ÀAiÀÄ£À C©üªÀÈ¢Þ E¯ÁSÉ, PÉƼÉîÃUÁ® PÀbÉÃjAiÀÄ°è ¢£ÁAPÀ: 01-04-2009 jAzÀ 23-08-2010 gÀªÀgÉUÉ PÁAiÀÄð¤ªÀð»¹zÀ CªÀ¢üAiÀÄ°è E¯ÁSɬÄAzÀ C£ÀĵÁ×£ÀUÉƽ¹gÀĪÀ ªÀĺÁvÀä UÁA¢ü gÁ¶ÖçÃAiÀÄ UÁæ«ÄÃt GzÉÆåÃUÀ SÁvÀj AiÉÆÃd£ÉAiÀÄ (MGNREGA) ¯ÉPÀÌ vÀ¥Á¸ÀuÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß f¯Áè ¥ÀAZÁAiÀÄvï, ZÁªÀÄgÁd£ÀUÀgÀ, EªÀgÀÄ PÉÊUÉÆAqÀÄ ¸À°è¹gÀĪÀ ªÀgÀ¢AiÀÄ°è ¸ÀzÀj ¤ªÀÈvÀÛ C¢üPÁjUÀ½AzÀ ªÀ¸ÀƯÁw ªÀiÁqÀ¨ÉÃPÁzÀ ªÉÆvÀÛ gÀÆ.20,29,738/- ªÀÄvÀÄÛ DPÉëÃ¥ÀuÁ ªÉÆvÀÛ gÀÆ.3,23,07,373/- UÀ½gÀÄvÀÛzÉ ºÁUÀÆ ªÀ¸ÀƯÁwUÉ ¨ÁQ¬ÄgÀĪÀ ªÉÆvÀÛªÀ£ÀÄß C£ÀĵÁ×£Á¢üPÁjUÀ¼ÀÄ ¸ÀA§AzsÀ¥ÀlÖªÀjAzÀ ªÀ¸ÀƯÁw ªÀiÁr dªÀiÁ ªÀiÁqÀĪÀAvÉ ºÁUÀÆ ªÀ¸ÀƯÁw ªÀiÁqÀ¢zÀÝ°è ¸ÀPÁðgÀPÉÌ £ÀµÀÖ GAmÁzÀgÉ, D £ÉÃgÀ dªÁ¨ÁÝgÀgÁUÀÄvÁÛgÉAzÀÄ ªÀgÀ¢¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. F »£É߯ÉAiÀÄ°è ²æà f.J¸ï EAzsÀÆzÀgÀ ªÀÄÆwð, ¤ªÀÈvÀÛ ¸ÀºÁAiÀÄPÀ PÀȶ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ, EªÀjAzÀ ªÀ¸ÀƯÁw ªÀiÁqÀ¨ÉÃPÁzÀ ªÉÆvÀÛ gÀÆ.26,29,738/- ªÀÄvÀÄÛ DPÉëÃ¥ÀuÁ ªÉÆvÀÛ gÀÆ.3,23,97,373/- UÀ¼ÀÄ ¨ÁQ EgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ, F §UÉÎ ¸ÀzÀjAiÀĪÀgÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ SINIOR CIVIL AND JMFC £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄ PÉƼÉîÃUÁ® ¹«¯ï zÁªÉ zÁR°¸À¯ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. F CA±ÀUÀ¼À DzsÁgÀzÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É ªÀiÁ£Àå PÉ.J.n.

Cfð ¸ÀASÉå:558/2020 gÀ°è ªÀiÁ£Àå PÀ£ÁðlPÀ DqÀ½vÀ £ÁåAiÀÄ ªÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄÄ ¢£ÁAPÀ:03-03-2023 gÀAzÀÄ ¤ÃrgÀĪÀ DzÉñÀzÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ ªÀiÁ£Àå GZÀÑ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ°è E¯ÁSɬÄAzÀ ªÉÄîä£À« ¸À°è¸À§ºÀÄzÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ JA§ C©ü¥ÁæAiÀĪÀ£ÀÄß ¸À°è¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. £ÀµÀÖPÉÌ C£ÀĵÁ×£Á¢üPÁjUÀ¼Éà ªÉÄîÌAqÀ CA±ÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß CªÀUÁ»¹zÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄÄ, ²æà f.J¸ï EAzsÀÆzÀgÀ ªÀÄÆwð, ¤ªÀÈvÀÛ ¸ÀºÁAiÀÄPÀ PÀȶ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ, EªÀjAzÀ ¸ÀPÁðgÀPÉÌ ºÉaÑ£À ªÉÆvÀÛ ªÀ¸ÀƯÁwUÁV ¨ÁQ¬ÄgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ ºÁUÀÆ F «µÀAiÀÄPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ FUÁUÀ¯Éà ¸ÀzÀjAiÀĪÀgÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ SINIOR CIVIL AND JMFC £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄ PÉƼÉîÃUÁ® E°è ¹«¯ï zÁªÉ zÁR°¸À¯ÁVgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ, ªÀiÁ£Àå PÉ.J.n. Cfð ¸ÀASÉå:558/2020 gÀ°è ªÀiÁ£Àå £ÁåAiÀĪÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄÄ ¢£ÁAPÀ:03.03.2023gÀAzÀÄ ¤ÃrgÀĪÀ DzÉñÀzÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ ªÀiÁ£Àå GZÀÑ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ°è ªÉÄîä£À« ¸À°è¸À®Ä À¥ÀlÖªÀjUÉ ¸ÀÆPÀÛ ¤zÉÃð±À£À PÀÆqÀ¯Éà CUÀvÀå PÀæªÀĪÀ»¸ÀĪÀAvÉ ¸ÀA§Azs ¤ÃqÀĪÀAvÉ ¤tð¬Ä¸À¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ. ¸ÀASÉå: PÀÈE 52 PÀÈ¥Àj 2021 ¸À»/- HC-KAR - 13 - NC: 2026:KHC:9991-DB WP No. 10947 of 2024 («.C£ÀÄâPÀĪÀiÁgï) ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð, PÀȶ E¯ÁSÉ

The writ petition averments at paragraph No.19 would indicate filing of O.S. No.19/2023 before the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Kollegala on 20.03.2023 for recovery of certain amount from the respondent herein. The said filing of O.S. No.19/2023 is without determining the amount in any proceedings, much less, the departmental proceedings. Moreover, the filing of the above suit is also barred under Rule 214(3) of KCSRs, which reads as follows: "214(3) No judicial proceedings, if not instituted while the Government servant was in service, whether before his retirement or during his re-employment, shall be instituted in respect of a cause of action which arose or in respect of an event which took place, more than four years before such institution. "

No judicial proceedings against retired Government servant could be initiated in respect of a cause of action, which arose or in respect of an event which took place more than four years before such institution. In the instant case, respondent retired on attaining the age of superannuation - 14 - NC: 2026:KHC:9991-DB WP No. 10947 of 2024 HC-KAR on 31.10.2018 and the suit is admittedly filed on 20.03.2023 in respect of an event from 22.11.2006 to 24.08.2010, when the respondent was working as Assistant Director of Agriculture Officer at Kollegala. We are aware of the scope of the writ petition. Whether the suit is maintainable or not is to be considered by the appropriate forum, however we have explained the legal position. Moreover, one of the reason for withholding retirement benefit was pendency of suit.

Admittedly, the State has not taken any action against the respondent within the time prescribed under the Rules. Having failed to take any action against the respondent within the time prescribed under the Rules and having resorted to withhold the DCRG and the commuted value of pension and other retirement benefits of the respondent, the action of the petitioners is totally without jurisdiction and opposed to Rule 214 of KCSRs.

For delayed payment of the DCRG and leave encashment or any other retirement benefits excluding the commuted value of pension, the respondent would be entitled to interest at the rate of 8% per annum till 2022 and - 15 - NC: 2026:KHC:9991-DB WP No. 10947 of 2024 HC-KAR subsequent to 2022 at 5.5% per annum. If the committee in its proceedings dated 30.08.2023 had taken a conscious decision based on the advice of the legal officers as well as taking note of Rule 214(3) of KCSRs, the State would have saved some interest payment. The Board has failed to apply its mind while taking the decision to file writ petition. The Board while taking decision in its proceedings dated 30.08.2023 to file the writ petition has not even looked into the legal provisions. When no proceedings, much less departmental proceedings or criminal proceedings were initiated against the respondent, only on the ground of audit objection, withholding DCRG and retirement benefits would be without jurisdiction, unreasonable and unfair. Even the suit filed against the respondent is contrary to Rule 214(3) of KCSRs.

The purpose and object of constituting the Board would be defeated if the Board takes decisions mechanically, without examining the matter in the light of the legal provision, which would ultimately result in financial burden on the State. In the instant case, though we find lapses on the part of the Board members while taking decision to file the writ petition, - 16 - NC: 2026:KHC:9991-DB WP No. 10947 of 2024 HC-KAR since they are not before this Court, we refrain from directing any action against them. It is for the State Government to take appropriate action against the members of the Board.

Memo dated 18.02.2026 seeking leave to withdraw the writ petition is filed along with Government Order dated

17.02.2026 is placed on record.

The pensionary/retirement benefit respondent shall be settled within three weeks from today.