- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:972 WP No. 60186 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT WRIT PETITION NO. 60186 OF 2014 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SMT. LALTIHAMMA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, WORKING AS A GROUP-D EMPLOYEE, D.R.D.A. CELL, ZILLA PANCHAYATH, CHICKAMAGALUR DISTRICT, CHICKMAGALUR-577 101. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. V.R. SARATHY, ADV.) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYATH RAJ, VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001. 2. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ZILLA PANCHAYATH, CHICKAMAGALUR DISTRICT, CHICKAMAGALUR-577 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. N ANITHA, AGA FOR R1 SRI ASHOK N NAYAK, ADV. FOR R2) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH PREMAKUMARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:972 WP No. 60186 of 2014 ENTIRE RECORDS, PERTAINING TO THE CASE AND QUASH THE ORDERS DATED 21.05.2013 VIDE ANNX-F ISSUED BY THE R-2 (SO FAR IT RELATES TO PORTION OF ORDER OF RECOVERY IS CONCERNED) AS THE SAME ARE ILLEGAL, UNJUST, ARBITRARY, MALAFIDE AND UNREASONABLE. 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 ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash orders bearing No.f¥ÀAa/D2/¹§âA¢/¹Dgï-32/09-10 dated 21.05.2013 (Annexure-F) by which, recovery is ordered on the ground that the petitioner is paid excess salary. 2. Learned counsel Sri.Ashok N Nayak for respondent No.2 has filed a memo dated 07.01.2025 enclosing four documents and submits that no recovery is effected, since the petitioner has retired. 3. In the letter of the petitioner enclosed to the memo the petitioner has stated that she has received all the benefits, which she is entitled to receive from the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:972 WP No. 60186 of 2014 Government, such as, DCRG, Commutation of Pension, etc. 4. In view of the above, the prayer of the petitioner would no more survive for consideration and accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE MPK CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38