B.S.KRISHNA PRASAD Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was appointed on 11.04.1977, by the State in the cadre of Karnataka Administrative Services. After earning promotion, the petitioner is said to have reached the post of Karnataka Administrative Services (Senior Scale) (Selection Grade) and (Super Time Scale). On 15.07.2008, the petitioner was appointed as Member of the Karnataka Public Service Commission under Article 216(1) of Constitution of India. The petitioner retired from service on 16.07.2014, as Member of the Karnataka Public Service Commission. Immediately thereafter, a 'No Due Certificate' stating that no dues are outstanding from the petitioner was issued by the respondent No.3-Karnataka Public Service Commission. The unutilized Earned Leave that was standing to the credit of petitioner was also sanctioned by respondent No.3. Thereafter, respondent No.4-Principal Accountant General (A&E) requested the petitioner to furnish the particular about the pendency of Departmental/judicial proceedings against the petitioner so as to enable respondent No.4 to release commuted value of the pension amount. On 15.07.2014, the petitioner contends that he has made a representation and duly submitted the pension papers in triplicate. The petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that even after expiry of more than 1 year 4 months, pension was not settled. Being aggrieved the petitioner is before this court seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay commutation value of pension along with 18% interest on the delayed payment of arrears of pensionary benefits of Rs.6,96,322/-.

(2.) Sri. M.S. Bhagwat, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner places reliance on two judgments. It is submitted that in the case of State of Jharkhand and others V/s Jitendra Kumar Srivatsa and another reported in 2013 (12) SCC 210, the Apex Court has held that the right of the petitioner to receive the pension is 'property' under Article 31(1) and by mere executive order, the State had no power to withhold the same. In the case of Mohan Shankar Magajikandi V/s The Managing Director, Karnataka State Warehousing Limited and another in W.P.No.80549/2013, which was disposed of on 28.03.2018, this court while referring to Rule 214 and 215-A of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules, 1958, has held that where the Government dues or amount of any pecuniary loss is assessed it is recoverable under the said Rule, from the pensionary benefits or gratuity or any amounts payable to the employee. It was also held that it was mandatory on the part of the employer to hold the departmental enquiry before recovering or withholding any amount legally payable to the employee. If such enquiry has not been initiated within four years from the date of alleged misconduct or not initiated after four years with the sanction of the Government, then such proceedings cannot be relied upon to withhold the pensionary benefits.

(3.) Taking support from the above said decisions, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the present case there is no departmental enquiry held or pending against the petitioner. Since the petitioner retired from the services on 16.07.2014, it is quite evident that as required under Rule 214 of the Rules, action is not initiated against the petitioner within the stipulated period. Therefore, it is contended that the inaction on the part of the respondents in granting value of pension is in violation of the provisions governing the disbursal of pension. It is therefore, submitted that the prayer made by the petitioner may be granted.