VINUTHA B v. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION

(BY SRI B. RAVINDRANATH, AGA) …PETITIONERS - 2 - NC: 2026:KHC:20654-DB WP No. 16481 of 2021 HC-KAR AND:

1. SMT. VIMALA M. C., 62 YEARS, W/O LATE RAJENDRA C.G., No.89-C, 2ND STAGE, LIG KHB KUVEMPU NAGAR, MYSURU-570 023. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI M.S. RUDRAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR C/R) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 13.01.2021 (ANNEXURE - A) IN APPLICATION No.1863/2020 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP 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 petitioners - authorities are before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India questioning the order dated 13.01.2021 in Application No.1863/2020 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru [for short 'Tribunal'] whereunder, the respondent's application is allowed with the following directions; - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:20654-DB WP No. 16481 of 2021 HC-KAR "9. Accordingly, we allow the delay application under I.A.No.I and condone the delay. The main application is partly allowed. The impugned order bearing No. ¹§âA¢/31/EfJ£ï/2013-14 dated 26.06.2014 passed by respondent No.2 withholding pensionary benefits and produced vide Annexure- A7 is hereby set aside and the Respondents are hereby directed to release the pensionary benefits of deceased C.G. Rajendra to the applicant to which she is legally entitled with all the consequential benefits. Time for compliance is three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order."

2. Brief facts of the case are that, the husband of the respondent was working as Co-operative Development Officer (CDO) in the Co-operative Department. While the husband of the respondent was working as Secretary, Taluk Agricultural Produce Marketing Co-operative Society Limited [TAPMCS], Gundlupet, certain misappropriations were alleged against him. For the alleged misappropriation, surcharge proceedings were initiated against the husband of the respondent and husband of the respondent was found guilty of misappropriation. However, based on such surcharge proceedings, no departmental - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:20654-DB WP No. 16481 of 2021 HC-KAR proceedings were initiated. The husband of the respondent retired on 30.06.2006 on attaining the age of superannuation and subsequently, died on 21.07.2015. Though the husband of the respondent retired in the year 2006 and died in the year 2015, the pensionary benefits of the husband of the respondent was not settled.

2.1 During the life time of the respondent, when he requested for settlement of pensionary benefits, endorsement dated

26.06.2014 (Annexure-A1) was issued stating that the husband of the respondent has been found guilty in surcharge proceedings and as such, his pensionary benefits are withheld. Questioning the said endorsement, the wife of the respondent approached the Tribunal with a prayer to quash endorsement and for a direction to the petitioners to release and pay the pensionary benefits with interest at 12% per annum from 01.07.2006. The said application was allowed directing to release the pensionary benefits which the husband of the respondent was legally entitled to. Questioning the order of the Tribunal, the petitioners - State authorities are before this Court in this writ petition. - 5 - NC: 2026:KHC:20654-DB WP No. 16481 of 2021 HC-KAR

3. We have heard learned Additional Government Advocate for the petitioners and perused the entire writ petition papers.

4. It is an admitted fact that no departmental enquiry is initiated to determine the liability of the husband of the respondent. The withholding of pensionary benefits is not determined in any proceedings during the life time of the husband of the respondent, in a legally instituted departmental proceeding.

5. Rules 214 and 214(A) of Karnataka Civil Service Rules [for short 'KCSRs'] provides with holding or withdrawal of a pension or portion of pension, if the government servant is found guilty in any departmental proceedings or the authorities can withhold the pensionary benefits, if the departmental enquiry is pending as on the date of retirement of a government servant or if the departmental proceedings is instituted subsequent to retirement of such government servant, if it is within the prescribed limitation under Rule 214 of the KCSRs. - 6 - NC: 2026:KHC:20654-DB WP No. 16481 of 2021 HC-KAR

6. In the instant case, on perusal of the impugned order passed by the Tribunal, it is seen that no departmental proceedings were initiated against the husband of the respondent before his death. When the liability is not determined in a legally instituted departmental proceeding, the petitioners have no authority to withhold the pension or pensionary benefits of a government servant. In the instant case, the withholding of pensionary benefits of the husband of respondent is without jurisdiction. The only reason stated is, in surcharge proceedings, the husband of the respondent was found guilty and is due to government in a sum of Rs.62,90,635/-. However, on the basis of the said finding, no departmental enquiry was instituted. If it is found that the husband of the respondent was due to government in surcharge proceedings, the petitioners ought to have proceeded against the husband of the respondent under the provisions of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959. Having not instituted departmental enquiry against the husband of the respondent, the petitioners had no authority or jurisdiction to withhold the pensionary benefits to which the husband of the respondent was entitled to. The Tribunal is justified in allowing - 7 - NC: 2026:KHC:20654-DB WP No. 16481 of 2021 HC-KAR the application and directing release of the entire pensionary benefits of the late husband of the respondent.

7. We do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the Tribunal. There is no merit in the writ petition and accordingly, the writ petition stands rejected.

8. The Tribunal denied interest on withheld pensionary benefits on the ground that the amount was withheld with a bona fide intention, considering that surcharge proceedings were initiated against the husband of the respondent and based on the complaint filed against the respondent by the Food and Civil Supplies Department, criminal cases are instituted and abated because of the death of the delinquent.

9. We have come to the conclusion that withholding of the pension and pensionary benefits is without jurisdiction. The finding of the Tribunal that action of the petitioners is bona fide cannot be accepted in the facts and circumstances of the present case. When the petitioners have failed to take action in accordance with law in terms of service rules governing the husband of the respondent, it cannot be said that withholding - 8 - NC: 2026:KHC:20654-DB WP No. 16481 of 2021 HC-KAR of pensionary benefits is bona fide. As such, the respondent is entitled to release of the entire pensionary benefits with interest at 5% p.a. in terms of the existing government order. Time for compliance is two months from today. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE MV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8