- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14593 WP No. 101349 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 101349 OF 2024 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: K. G. JAGANNATH S/O. K.R. GOVIND, AGE. 63 YEARS, OCC. RETIRED SR. CLOTH DESIGNER , R/O NO. 59 , 1ST MAIN ROAD, 2ND CROSS, LAXMI LAYOUT, NEAR MAHALAXMI TEMPLE, ABBIGERE, BENGALURU – 560 090. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. P.S.TADAPATRI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE PRESIDENT, KARNATAKA HANDALOOM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., PRIYADARSHINI, NEKARA BHAVAN, VIDYANAGAR, HUBBALLI – 580 031, DIST. DHARWAD. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA HANDALOOM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., PRIYADARSHINI, NEKARA BHAVAN, VIDYANAGAR, HUBBALLI – 580 031, DIST. DHARWAD. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRAKASH ANDANIMATH, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER IN NO. DATED 08/05/2020 DIRECTING TO RECOVER RS. 80,000/- FROM HIS RAKESH S HARIHAR Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Date: 2025.10.31 06:27:31 +0000 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14593 WP No. 101349 of 2024 SALARY IN 4 EQUAL MONTHLY INSTALLMENTS OF RS.20,000/- EACH COMMENCING FROM APRIL 2020 AND FURTHER DIRECTED TO PAY THE SAID AMOUNT TO M/S. AMAY CREATIONS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.2; ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT IN NO. DATED 05/09/2022 AT ANNEXURE-F ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.2; ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY DIRECTION TO THE RESPONDENT CORPORATION TO REFUND AN AMOUNT OF RS. 80,000/- ILLEGALLY RECOVERED FROM HIS SALARY FOR THE MONTHS FROM APRIL, MAY, JUNE AND JULY 2020 AND PAY INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 15% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF RECOVERY TILL ACTUAL DATE OF PAYMENT ALONG WITH COMPENSATION FOR THE HARASSMENT, MENTAL AGONY AND MISERY INCLUDING THE COST OF PROSECUTING THIS LITIGATION, VISITING AND CORRESPONDING WITH THE RESPONDENT OFFICE FOR ALL THESE YEARS AND FURTHER DIRECT THE SAME TO BE BINDING ON THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY AND PRESIDENT KHDC NEKAR BHAVAN, VIDYA NAGAR, HUBBALLI TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO PAY THESE AMOUNTS AND INTEREST WITHIN ONE MONTH FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF THE ORDER OF THIS HON BLE COURT AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) 1. The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the action of the respondents ruling by Karnataka Handloom Development Corporation, by which the amount of ₹80,000/- has been recovered from the salary of the petitioner by way of four monthly instalment of Rs.20,000/- each commencing from April 2023 from the date of his retirement. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14593 WP No. 101349 of 2024 2. Heard the learned counsel Smt.Padmaja S. Tadapatri appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel Sri.Prakash Andanimath representing the respondents. 3. The facts in brief germane are as follows: The service particulars of the petitioner need not be narrated at the case at hand as they are not germane to the issue at hand. It would suffice if the narration would be from the year 2018 i.e. on 25.09.2018 when the petitioner submitted a proposal to the Managing Director of the Corporation through the Controller of Accounts to convert 15,000 metres of printed cloth into bed sheet and pillow covers at approved rates of stitching and stitching charges. The Managing Director is said to have written a remark on the proposal “please discuss” and accordingly the file was returned to the Controller of Accounts. The Controller of Accounts without writing any remark thereon is said to have put his signature and returned the file to the petitioner. 4. The petitioner was not aware of the order of the Managing Director which had observed the aforesaid “please discuss” remark. Therefore, the petitioner went forward and - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14593 WP No. 101349 of 2024 converted the printed bed sheets and pillow covers as was proposed. This happens in the year 2018. The audit objections appear to have cropped up later, which led to recovery of the amount of ₹80,000/- from the salary of the petitioner. ₹80,000/- was not recovered at one stroke, but by equal monthly instalments of ₹20,000/-. The issue is whether such recovery could be made without even issuing a notice to the petitioner. Admittedly recovery of money is a major issue. Recovery of money does have economic and penal consequences upon the petitioner and the recovery of money and also recovery from salary, is also a specific penalty under the Rules. 5. In that light the said recovery could not have been made at the outset in compliance with the principles of natural justice in the least or an enquiry to be conducted in the event the petitioner would dispute his claim. On the sole reason that the petitioner is robbed off his salary without even issuing a notice, the order impugned would be rendered unsustainable. The unsustainability of the order would lead to its obliteration. Even otherwise for an enquiry further, recovery from salary to be made, though it is a minor penalty, if the employee would dispute it, an enquiry must ensue, is the law laid down by the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14593 WP No. 101349 of 2024 Apex Court in the case of O.K. Bhardwaj v. Union of India, (2001) 9 SCC 180. 6. In the light of the law being clear and the issue and the imposition or taking away of the salary of the petitioner being raised by in gross violation of principles of natural justice, the natural consequence would be the success of the petition. 7. In that light the petition deserves to succeed with a direction to the quashment of the order and with a direction to the respondents to reimburse the amount that is withdrawn from the salary of the petition. 8. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that though no notice was issued and the recovery is made, they are now seeking liberty to issue notice and affect the recovery or take action in accordance with law. The petitioner has retired on attaining the age of superannuation in the year 2020. The issue is as narrated hereinabove. 9. In that light since the petitioner has retired from service to give a quietus to the issue, I deem it appropriate not to reserve liberty to the respondents to initiate any proceedings - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14593 WP No. 101349 of 2024 or initiate any proceedings. The only relief that the respondents could get at this juncture is denial of interest for the petitioners. The refund of the amount as is the refund of the amount. 10. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER i. Writ Petition is allowed. ii. The impugned order dated 08/05/2020 directing to recover ₹80,000/- from petitioner’s salary in four equal monthly instalments of ₹20,000/- each commencing from April 2020 and further directed to pay the said amount to M/s.Amay Creations produced at Annexure-A issued by respondent No.2 stand quashed. iii. The respondents are directed to reimburse/refund the amount of ₹80,000/- to the hands of the petitioner within outer limit of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. iv. In the event the amount is not reimbursed or refunded within 4 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order, the petitioner would become - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14593 WP No. 101349 of 2024 entitled to interest at 6% per annum till the date it is paid. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE KGK/CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 85