- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11843 WP No. 107073 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 107073 OF 2014 (S-R) BETWEEN: SRI. GOPAL, S/O. HANAMANTAPPA METI, AGE: 75 YEARS, OCC: RETIRE FROM SERVICE, R/O. HANGARAGI, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. M.C.HUKKERI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICE ZILLA PANCHAYAT, BAGALKOT DISTRICT, BAGALKOT. 2. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TALUKA PANCHAYAT, BILAGI, BAGALKOT DISTRICT, BAGALKOT. 3. THE DISTRICT TREASURY OFFICER BAGALKOT DISTRICT, BAGALKOT. Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11843 WP No. 107073 of 2014 4. THE SUB-TREASURY OFFICER, BADAMI, BAGALKOT DISTRICT. 5. THE SENIOR ACCOUNTS OFFICER, OFFICE OF PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E) KARNATAKA, PARK HOUSE ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. BHUSHAN B.KULKARNI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2 SRI. ASHOK T.KATTIMANI, AGA FOR R3 TO R5) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE BEARING SECTION:PV.X/R/2004-05/ R33647/13-14/72-75 DATED 09.06.2014 VIDE (ANNEXURE-D) AND RECOVERY NOTICE BEARING NO.PV10/1/1514079555/ 2500223538/B DATED 27.05.2014 VIDE (ANNEXURE-C) PASSED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT RESPECTIVELY AS THE SAME ARE ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY AND WITHOUT THE AUTHORITY OF LAW AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS NO.3 & 5 NOT TO DEDUCT THE PENSION AND REFUND THE DCRG AMOUNT OF THE PETITIONER RESPECTIVELY CONSEQUENT UPON QUASHING THE ORDERS AT ANNEXURE-C & D RESPECTIVELY. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11843 WP No. 107073 of 2014 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR) In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “(a) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order quashing the impugned notice bearing Section:PV.X/R2004-05/R33647/13-14/72-75 dated: 09.06.2014 vide (Annexure-D) and recovery notice bearing NO:PV10/1/1514079555/2500223538/ /B dated: 27.05.2014 vide (Annexure-C) passed by the 5th respondent respectively as the same are illegal, arbitrary and without the authority of law. (b) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents No.3 & 5 not to deduct the pension and refund the DCRG amount of the petitioner respectively consequent upon quashing the orders at Annexure-C & D respectively.” 2. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner, who was appointed as a Gram Sevak in respondents No.1 and 2-Gram Panchayat, attained the age of superannuation on 30.04.2003. The request of the petitioner for payment of pension was considered by respondent No.5 only in the year 2010 and the pension - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11843 WP No. 107073 of 2014 amount was disbursed in favour of the petitioner on 07.02.2011 after a lapse of more than seven years. Subsequently, respondent No.5 proceeds to issue the impugned notice at Annexure-C dated 28.05.2014 and Annexure-D dated 09.06.2014 not only purporting to adjust the pension already paid/disbursed in favour of the petitioner, but also purporting to recover the alleged excess pension paid to the petitioner aggrieved by which the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. 3. A perusal of the impugned communications at Annexure-C dated 28.05.2014, and Annexure-D dated 09.06.2014 indicate that, after the petitioner having attained the age of superannuation in the year 2003 and after having disbursed pension to which the petitioner was entitled to in the year 2011, the action of respondent No.5 in issuing the impugned communication purporting to adjust excess payment and to recover the excess payment is - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11843 WP No. 107073 of 2014 clearly erroneous inasmuch as, a perusal of the impugned communications at Annexure-C dated 28.05.2014, and Annexure-D dated 09.06.2014 will indicate that absolutely no reasons are assigned as to how the respondents would be entitled to recover the said amounts mentioned in the said communications from the petitioner. In fact, there is absolutely no quantification and details of the payment and respondent No.5 has unilaterally stated a particular amount to be recovered without any basis, by issuing the impugned cryptic, laconic, and a non-speaking communication which is without any legal or factual basis and without making any allegation against the petitioner and, as such, I am of the view that the impugned communications at Annexures-C and D that was to be issued by respondent No.5 deserve to be quashed. It is also relevant to state that so long as the excess payment is not attributable or attributed to the petitioner or his conduct or his action, the question of the respondents recovering the alleged excess amount from the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11843 WP No. 107073 of 2014 petitioner would not arise in the facts and circumstances of the instant case. Hence, I pass the following: ORDER i) The petition is allowed. ii) The impugned communications dated 09.06.2014 vide (Annexure-D) and the recovery notice dated 27.05.2014 (Annexure-C) passed by the 5th respondent are hereby quashed iii) Liberty is reserved in favour of the respondents to take appropriate action subject to all just exceptions and limitation, and in accordance with law. Sd/- (S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE KMS Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31