C.R.

W.P.C. is filed challenging retension of petitioners retirement benefits, particularly DCRG, pursuant to request for recovery made by KSFE. Counsel for the petitioner contended that though petitioner signed security documents standing as surety for another colleague for releasing loan amount by KSFE to him, he was not aware of the consequences. Government Pleader submitted that petitioner in the format issued by the company stood as surety unconditionally agreeing for recovery from his salary and retirement benefits which obviously include DCRG, if the borrower defaults payments. Admittedly defaulter has not made payments and recovery is initiated pursuant to the request made by KSFE in terms of security bond executed by the petitioner. Even though counsel for the petitioner submitted that in order to recover from DCRG, petitioner has to express his concent. I do not think such consent should always be in favour of the department. In other words, even consent given to creditor organization like KSFE or Bank unconditionally agreeing for recovery from his retirement benefits will be sufficient compliance of Ruling 1 of Rule 3 Part III KSR, which authorizes recovery fo