Karnataka High Court
Dr V T Banu vs Managing Director on 23 March, 2023
-1-
WP NO.12013 OF 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF MARCH, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH
WRIT PETITION NO.12013 OF 2021 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
DR. V.T. BANU
W/O VENKATESH
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
OCCUPATION: RETIRED EMPLOYEE OF KPCL,
R/AT PRABHAKIRANA,
ASHOK NAGARA,
MANGALURU - 575 006.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. HANUMANTHAPPA B. HARAVI GOWDAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
MANAGING DIRECTOR
KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION LTD.
SHAKTHI BHAVAN,
Digitally signed by
NO.82, RACE COURSE ROAD,
ARUN KUMAR M S
Location: High
BENGALURU - 560 001.
Court of Karnataka
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. PRADYUMNA L. NARASIMHA, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
QUASH THE IMPUGNED OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM/ORDER
DATED 25TH SEPTEMBER, 2020 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT
VIDE ANNEXURE-Q INSOFAR AS WITHHOLDING OF
RS.10,03,259/- FROM THE PENSION AMOUNT OF THE
PETITIONER; DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE
-2-
WP NO.12013 OF 2021
REPRESENTATION DATED 01ST FEBRUARY, 2021 VIDE
ANNEXURE-R; AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
In this petition, the petitioner has challenged the Official Memorandum / Order dated 25th September, 2020 (Annexure- Q) passed by the respondent-Corporation, withholding Rs.10,03,259/- from the pension amount of the petitioner; inter-alia sought for direction to respondent to consider the representation dated 01st February, 2021 (Annexure-R).
2. Heard Sri. Hanumanthappa B. Haravi Gowdar, appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Pradyumna L. Narasimha, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Corporation.
3. Sri. Hanumanthappa B. Haravi Gowdar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner invited the attention of the Court to the reasons stated in the impugned order dated 25th September, 2020 (Annexure-Q) and submitted that the pension of the petitioner was not released on account of the fact that the petitioner has not passed Master of Surgery (General Surgery). Accordingly, he referred to the Convocation certificate issued by Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences -3- WP NO.12013 OF 2021 (Annexure-F), wherein it is stated that the petitioner has passed Master of Surgery (General Surgery) on 30th March, 2011 and contended that the reasons assigned by the respondent-Corporation, withholding the pensionary benefits to the petitioner is not correct.
4. Per contra, Sri. Pradyumna L. Narasimha, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Corporation submits that the petitioner ought to have passed the Master of Surgery in stipulated period as per the regulations of respondent- Corporation and accordingly, he supports the impugned order dated 25th September, 2020.
5. In the light of submission made by learned counsel appearing for the parties, on careful examination of impugned order dated 25th September, 2020 (Annexure-Q) would indicate that the respondent-Corporation has withheld the retiral/pensionary benefit on the ground that the petitioner has not completed the course of Master of Surgery (General Surgery). However, taking into account the documents produced by the petitioner particularly the Convocation Certificate (Annexure-F) issued by Rajiv Gandhi University of -4- WP NO.12013 OF 2021 Health Sciences, wherein it is stated that the petitioner has completed the Master of Surgery (General Surgery) on 30th March, 2011, the impugned order dated 25th September, 2020 (Annexure-Q) is liable to be set-aside as the petitioner has completed the course as per Convocation certificate issued by the Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Science. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
(a) Writ petition is allowed;
(b) Official Memorandum / Order dated 25th September, 2020 (Annexure-Q) issued by the respondent-Corporation is set-aside;
(c) Petitioner is entitled for pensionary benefits.
SD/-
JUDGE ARK