- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14669 WP No. 107899 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 107899 OF 2024 (S-R) BETWEEN: PREMALATHA D/O. MADHAV NARAYAN PRABHU @ P. M. PRABHU, AGE. 67 YEARS, OCC. RETIRED STENOGRAPHER, R/O. 125, ARUN COLONY, GOKUL ROAD, HUBBALLI – 580 030. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ABHISHEK L. KALLED, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, ROOM NO. 434, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER HUBLI DHARWAD URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI - 580 025. 3. THE AUDIT OFFICER, HUBBALI-DHARWAD URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI – 580 025. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1, SRI. SHARANABASAWA, ADV. FOR R2 AND R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT ORDER IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE ANNEXURE-E KRA. SAM. HU. DHA. NA. PRA. SIBBANDI. 2017-18 / 4319 / 2024-25 / 1935 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 14/08/2024 IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY ISSUE A WRIT ORDER OF DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO DISBURSE FULL COMMUTED VALUE OF PENSION FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF COMMUTED VALUE IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14669 WP No. 107899 of 2024 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) Petitioner is before this Court calling in question an order dated 14.08.2024 by which the claim of the petitioner for commutation of pension is rejected and seeks a consequential mandamus for disbursement of full commuted value of pension with effect from the date of his retirement. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner Sri. Abhishek L. Kalled, Sri. Sharanabasawa, representing respondent Nos.2 and 3 and the learned HCGP Smt. Girija Hiremath, representing respondent No.1. 3. The issue in the lis pertains to grant of commuted value of pension. Therefore, it would suffice if the dates and events are noted at the periphery. The petitioner joins the service of the respondent No.2 – Hubballi Dharwad Urban Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as the “Authority” for short) on 29.11.1982 and on attaining the age of superannuation retires on 31.07.2017. During the service of the petitioner it transpires that a departmental enquiry was pending even at the date of his retirement. Therefore, the petitioner was sanctioned provisional pension and all other terminal benefits - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14669 WP No. 107899 of 2024 were deferred on account of the pendency of the disciplinary proceedings. The enquiry against the petitioner comes to be dropped on 26.06.2024, thereby rendering his service in the Authority blemish free. Petitioner then was sanctioned commuted value of pension on 14.08.2024. The respondent No.2 – Authority while sanctioning commuted value of pension in terms of the representation or closure of the departmental enquiry, deducts 84 installments of commuted value of pension which is quantified to Rs.5,26,428/- from August 2017 to July 2024 ostensibly on the score of pendency of a departmental enquiry on the petitioner. It is this action of the respondent – Authority that has driven the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner Sri. Abhishek L. Kalled taking this Court to the documents appended to the petition would demonstrate that the deduction of 84 months from the sanction of commuted value of pension is blatantly contrary to law. As according to the learned counsel, in the departmental enquiry, the petitioner was not imposed any penalty, but the departmental enquiry itself stood dropped against him. Once it stood dropped, the petitioner would become - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14669 WP No. 107899 of 2024 entitled to all benefits that would flow to a regular employee, is the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. 5. Per contra, the learned counsel Sri. Sharanabasawa representing the Authority would take this Court through sub Rules (7) and (14) of Rule 376 of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules to defend the action of withholding of Rs.5,26,428/- as being 84 months of commuted value of pension. Learned counsel submits that since the enquiry was pending against him, no commuted value of pension could be granted and in terms of sub Rule (14) of Rule 376, he would interpret to contend that the commuted value of pension has to be sanctioned within 15 years after his retirement. Therefore, the respondent has time up to 75 years of a retired employee to grant commuted value of pension and therefore, no fault can be found with the action of the Authority. 6. The learned HCGP would submit that they are only a formal party and the pension has to be accorded or sanctioned, commuted value is to be granted by the Authority. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14669 WP No. 107899 of 2024 7. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the material on record. 8. The petitioner joins the service of the Authority on 29.11.1982 and she retires on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.07.2017 and is relieved from the services on the said date. During the service of the petitioner prior to her retirement, certain disciplinary proceedings were initiated against her which ultimately culminated in its closure, in terms of an order dated 26.06.2024. The order reads as follows: “¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ DzÉñÀ ¸ÀASÉå: £ÀCE 413 ¨ÉªÀÄ¥Áæ 2011, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ, ¢£ÁAPÀ: 26-06-2024 ¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£ÉAiÀÄ°è «ªÀj¹zÀ CA±ÀUÀ¼À »£É߯ÉAiÀÄ°è F ¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ°è C¥Á¢vÀgÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ PÁgÀt PÉüÀĪÀ £ÉÆÃn¹UÉ D¥Á¢vÀgÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ ¸À°è¹gÀĪÀ °TvÀ ¸ÀªÀÄeÁ¬Ä¶, DAiÀÄÄPÀÛgÀÄ, ºÀħâ½î-zsÁgÀªÁqÀ £ÀUÀgÁ©üªÀÈ¢Þ ¥Áæ¢üPÁgÀ gÀªÀgÀ ªÀgÀ¢AiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¥Àj²Ã°¹ ¸ÀPÁðgÀªÀÅ F PɼÀPÀAqÀAvÉ DzÉò¹zÉ. (1) ²æà JA. w¥ÉàñÀ »A¢£À DAiÀÄÄPÀÛgÀÄ, ºÀħâ½, zsÁgÀªÁqÀ £ÀUÀgÁ©üªÀÈ¢Þ, ¥Áæ¢üPÁgÀ ªÀÄÆ®vÀB PÉ.JA.J.J¸ï ¥ËgÁAiÀÄÄPÀÛgÀÄ (¤ªÀÈvÀÛ) ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ²æà ºÉZï ¥ÀgÀªÉÄñÀégÀ¥Àà »A¢£À ªÀåªÀ¸ÁÜ¥ÀPÀgÀÄ (¤ªÀÈvÀÛ) EªÀjAzÀ ºÀħâ½î, zsÁgÀªÁqÀ £ÀUÁj©üêÀÈ¢Ý ¥Áæ¢üPÁgÀ/¸ÀPÁðgÀPÉÌ GAmÁVgÀĪÀ DyðPÀ £ÀµÀÖªÀ£ÀÄß ¸ÀzÀjAiÀĪÀgÀ «gÀÄzÀÝ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ°è ¹«¯ï zÁªÉ ºÀÆr ªÀ¸ÀÆ° ªÀiÁrPÉƼÀî®Ä PÀæªÀÄ ªÀ»¸ÀĪÀAvÉ DAiÀÄÄPÀægÀÄ ºÀħâ½î zsÁgÀªÁqÀ £ÀUÁgÁ©üªÀÈ¢Ý ¥Áæ¢üPÁgÀgÀªÀjUÉ ¸ÀÆa¹ DzÉñÀ¹zÉ. 2) ²æêÀÄw ¤ªÀÄð¯Á gÁoÉÆÃqï »A¢£À ²ÃWÀæ°¦UÁgÀgÀÄ, ºÀħâ½î, zsÁgÀªÁqÀ £ÀUÀgÁ©üªÀÈ¢Þ ¥Áæ¢üPÁgÀ ¥Àæ¸ÀÄÛvÀ C¢üÃPÀëPÀgÀÄ £ÀUÀgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ UÁæªÀiÁAvÀgÀ CªÀgÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀ ªÀ®AiÀÄ PÀbÉÃj, zsÁgÀªÁqÀ EªÀgÀÄ UÀÆæ¥ï '¹' ªÀÈAzÀzÀ £ËPÀgÀgÁVgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ ¸ÀzÀjAiÀĪÀgÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14669 WP No. 107899 of 2024 ¤AiÀĪÀiÁ£ÀĸÁgÀ ²¸ÀÄÛ PÀæªÀÄ dgÀÄV¸ÀĪÀAvÉ DAiÀÄÄPÀÛgÀÄ £ÀUÀgÁ©üªÀÅæ¢Þ ¥Áæ¢üPÁgÀUÀ¼ÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ £ÀUÀgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ UÁæªÀiÁAvÀgÀ AiÉÆÃd£Á DAiÀÄÄPÁÛ®AiÀÄ gÀªÀjUÉ ¸ÀÆa¹ DzÉò¹zÉ. 2. F PɼÀPÀAqÀ C¢üPÁj/£ËPÀgÀgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß F ¥ÀæPÀgÀt¢AzÀ PÉÊ©lÄÖ DzÉò¹zÉ. 1) ²æà Dgï. J£ï ±Áå£À¨sÉÆÃUÀ »A¢£À DAiÀÄÄPÀÛgÀÄ (¤ªÀÈwÛ) 2) ²æêÀÄw Dgï. GªÀiÁ¥ÁªÀðw »A¢£À ªÀåªÀ¸ÁÜ¥ÀPÀgÀÄ (¤ªÀÈwÛ) 3) ²æà J¸ï. J¸ï. ¥ÁtÂ¥ÀnÖ ¤ªÀÈwÛ ¥Àæ.zÀ.¸À 4) ²æà J. «. ºÀ¢Ý ¤ªÀÈwÛ ¥Àæ.zÀ.¸À 5) ²æêÀÄw ¦. JA. ¥Àæ¨sÀÄ ¤ªÀÈvÀÛ ²ÃWÀæ°¦UÁgÀgÀÄ PÀ£ÁðlPÀ gÁdå¥Á®gÀ DzÉñÁ£ÀĸÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ CªÀgÀ ºÀ¸Àj£À°è (®vÁ.PÉ.) ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ C¢üãÀ PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð, (C©üªÀÈ¢, ªÁ¢üPÁgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ £ÀAiÉÆøÉÃ) £ÀUÀgÁ©üªÀÈ¢Þ E¯ÁSÉ” 9. The enquiry is not only pending against the petitioner, but the enquiry was initiated against several members but it is dropped against five, the name of the petitioner figures at Sl. No.5. At the said tenure time when the petitioner retired from service, the petitioner was entitled to all terminal benefits as a regular employee would get including commuted value of pension. Commutation of pension is a choice of a retired employee to choose as it is not a bounty that would be given by the respondent. If the employee seeks commuted value of pension, it would accordingly reduce the pension itself. Therefore, it is not from the coffers or the pocket of the Authority - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14669 WP No. 107899 of 2024 that the employee would be entitled to commuted value of pension. Nonetheless, only on the score that the departmental enquiry was pending against the petitioner, the commuted value of pension was not ordered. The enquiry ends up in the name of the petitioner being dropped. On the name of the petitioner being dropped, the petitioner thus becomes entitled to all the benefits that a regular employee would become entitled to on attaining the age of superannuation including commuted value of pension. Commuted value of pension is sanctioned no doubt, but with deduction from 31.07.2017 till the date of the closure of the departmental enquiry on account of dropping of the name of the petitioner. 10. The learned counsel for the respondent Sri. B. Sharanabasawa would place reliance upon sub Rules (7) and (14) of Rule 376. The said Rules read as follows: “376(7) A retired Government servant against whom departmental enquiry or judicial proceeding is pending shall not be allowed the benefit of commutation of pension till such time he is sanctioned final pension after the conclusion of the enquiry or proceeding as the case may be. In such case the declaration or deemed declaration shall be considered after the conclusion of the enquiry or proceeding and commuted value as admissible from the date of commencement of the pension shall be authorized by the Accountant General. In cases where on completion of enquiry, a penalty of reduction in pension - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14669 WP No. 107899 of 2024 on permanent basis or as a temporary measure is imposed from the date of such order, then commuted value is payable on the reduced pension after completion of enquiry.” “376(14) Where a retired Government Servant has commuted a portion of pension the portion of his commuted pension shall be restored to him from the first day of month following the expiry of a period of fifteen years from the date of commutation.” 11. Sub Rule (7) of Rule 376 indicates that a retired government servant against whom a departmental enquiry or a judicial proceeding is pending shall not be allowed the benefit of computation of pension till such time he is sanctioned final pension after conclusion of the enquiry as the case may be. 12. A perusal at the Rule in the first blush would indicate that the employee would not be entitled to commuted value of pension at the time of retirement if a departmental enquiry is pending. What happens if the employee is exonerated or name is dropped need not detain this Court for long or delve deep into the matter. 13. It is settled principle of law that, if a departmental inquiry ends in favour of an employee, it is as if there was no blemish against the said employee. In the case at hand, the name of the petitioner is dropped, nonetheless, after seven years - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14669 WP No. 107899 of 2024 of retirement. Therefore, it cannot be said by the respondent that the petitioner would not be entitled to committed value of pension as there is nothing against the petitioner to declare that the petitioner to have regularly retired on attaining the age of superannuation. 14. The other provision that is pressed into service by the learned counsel Shri B. Sharanabasawa is sub-rule 14, wherein a retired government servant has commuted a portion of pension, the portion of pension shall be restored to him on the first day of the month of expiry of a period of 15 years on the date of commutation. The commutation would begin on the date of retirement. Learned counsel would submit that the employer has a power to recover committed value of pension till 75 years of age of a retired employee on account of several circumstances. The said submission, to say the least, is preposterous. Learned counsel is misreading the regulation to defend the action of the Authority, which in the opinion of the Court is undefendable. Therefore, on the sole score that the petitioner having been exonerated or dropped from the departmental inquiry, would become entitled to all the benefits of - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14669 WP No. 107899 of 2024 a regular employee, committed value of pension is also a benefit that the regular employee would get. 15. Therefore, it was unfair, unjust and uncouth on the part of the Authority to have withheld ₹.5,26,428/- from the committed value of pension that is paid after the closure of the proceedings against the petitioner. Therefore, in the light of the dropping of the enquiry against the petitioner, though it has happened seven years after the retirement, it would date back to the date of retirement. Therefore, the petitioner becomes entitled to all the benefits of a regular employee on the date of retirement. The submissions of the learned counsel for the respondent are all untenable and contrary to law. Therefore, the petition deserves to succeed. 16. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The order dated 14.08.2024 vide Annexure-E issued by respondent No.2 stands quashed. (iii) The amount that is withheld from the committed value of pension of the petitioner - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14669 WP No. 107899 of 2024 shall be refunded to the petitioner within four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. (iv) In the event the amount is not made over to the petitioner within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order she would become entitled to interest at 12% p.a. from the date it fell due i.e., 31.07.2017 till the date it reaches the doors of the petitioner. Order accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE RSH & VNP / CT: ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1