N.S. RAJANI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

(2.) The only ground urged before us when this Writ Petition was taken-up for hearing by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the omission to challenge Annexure-A7 order of refixation of pay dtd. 3/7/2023, was an inadvertent mistake which happened to the petitioner and that as such the same should be permitted to be rectified. It is submitted that Annexure-A7 was an order by which the petitioner's salary was reduced and refixed with retrospective effect from 20/2/2002. It is submitted that the said refixation was done without even issuing any notice to the petitioner. It is stated that the said refixation itself would fall foul of the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab vs. Rafiq Masih,2014(4)SCC 334.

(3.) It is further contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that earlier, an O.A. had been filed challenging Annexure-A7 order of refixation. However, thereafter an official memorandum was issued on 18/8/2023 directing refixation of pension of the petitioner and recovery of excess salary paid to her. The application No.3537/2023 was therefore withdrawn. However, while withdrawing the O.A., by inadvertence, liberty was sought for and granted to challenge the letter dtd. 18/8/2023 alone. Therefore, though grounds were raised as against Annexure-A7, in the later Application No.4249/2023, the prayer was only against Annexure-A6 as well as Annexure-A8.