- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35847 WP No. 30732 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 30732 OF 2024 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SRI M R RENUKASWAMY S/O LATE M.R. REVANNA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS RETIRED REGIONAL MANAGER KARNATAKA STATE WARE HOUSING CORPORATION R/AT NO. 1669, 2ND CROSS, 2ND STAGE BALAMURIGANAPATHI TEMPLE STREET SRIRAMPURA, MYSURU - 570034. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. H J ANANDA., ADVOCATE) AND: THE KARNATAKA STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR NO.43, PRIME ROSE ROAD, P.B.NO. 2586 BENGALURU - 560025. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. VASANTHA A K., ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING NO. KAUNI/AA.MURU/61/2024-25/946 DATED: 13.08.2024 VIDE AT ANNEXURE-A ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35847 WP No. 30732 of 2024 ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 13.08.2024 vide Annexure-A, passed by the respondent withholding a sum of Rs.44,71,334/- from the retirement benefit of the petitioner. 2. The petitioner was appointed as a Technical Assistant in the respondent – Corporation. Thereafter, he was promoted as a Regional Manager and he was retired from service on 31.01.2024. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted a representation for sanction of retirement benefits. The respondent has issued the impugned order vide Annexure-A stating that since the petitioner has failed to recover a sum of Rs.44,71,334/- from the godown let out to KFCSC, the retirement benefit has been denied. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, without conducting any enquiry and without giving - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35847 WP No. 30732 of 2024 any notice, the impugned order has been passed. It is in violation of the principles of natural justice and contrary to the service rules. Hence, sought to allow the writ petition. 4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent submits that, the petitioner was working as a Regional Manager in the Corporation, and it was the duty of the petitioner to collect the rents from the tenants. He has failed to collect the rent from the KSCSC in a sum of Rs.44,71,334/-. Therefore, the retirement benefit has been retained. Hence, sought to dismiss the writ petition. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the petition papers. 6. The petitioner was appointed as a Technical Assistant in the respondent - Corporation. Thereafter, he was promoted as Assistant Manager and in the year 2020 he was promoted as Deputy Manager and in the year 2021 as Regional Manager in Mysore Division and he retired from the service on 31.01.2024, on attaining the age of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35847 WP No. 30732 of 2024 superannuation. The respondent, without conducting any enquiry, imposed penalty of withholding the retirement benefits of the petitioner, on the ground that, the petitioner has failed to collect the rent from the KSCSC in a sum of Rs.44,71,334/-. The impugned order at Annexure-A is passed without giving any notice and without conducting any enquiry. On this ground alone, the impugned order requires to be quashed. 7. In view of the above, the following order is passed: (i) The writ petition stands disposed of. (ii) The impugned order vide Annexure-A dated 13.08.2024 is quashed. (iii) The respondent is directed to consider the representations submitted by the petitioner at Annexure-P series, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, not later - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35847 WP No. 30732 of 2024 than three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (iv) It is made clear that, if the law permits, the respondent is at liberty to initiate the departmental enquiry, in accordance with law. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE CM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 71