This intra-court appeal is filed under Section 4 of the

Karnataka High Courts Act challenging the order dated

13.09.2021, passed in W.P.No.12029/2016 by the learned

Single Judge.

2. Brief facts leading rise to filing of this appeal are

as under:

Respondent No.1, a retired Manager Grade-II of the

appellant – the Karnataka State Handicrafts Development

Corporation Limited. The respondent filed a writ petition

challenging the office order dated 17.01.2015, wherein the

respondents’ pay was re-fixed and ordered to recover a

- 3 -

sum of Rs.1,25,016/- from the terminal benefits of the

respondent No.1 and also prayed for quashing the board

resolution dated 26.12.2014, wherein the benefits accrued

to respondent No.1 was curtailed in respect of leave

encashment benefit by opting Karnataka State Civil

Services Rules (for short ‘the KCSRs’) and consequently to

quash the order dated 10.02.2015 and further a direction

to the appellant to release an amount of Rs.1,87,293/-

deducted from leave encashment benefit along with

interest from the date of his superannuation.

It is the case of the appellant that respondent No.1

would not be entitled for time bound advancement and as

well as promotion to next higher cadre of Manager Grade-

II simultaneously. Respondent No.1 was wrongly granted

time bound advancement under the office order dated

05.02.2001. Respondent No.1 was promoted two days

before the office order dated 05.02.2001 i.e., on

03.02.2001. It is contended that when once respondent

No.1 was promoted to the next higher cadre of Manager

- 4 -

Grade-II, he would not be entitled for time bound

advancement. It is the time bound advancement is

granted only where an employee continuous in a particular

cadre without promotion for more than ten years.

Respondent No.1 was accorded promotion to the next

higher

cadre

of

Manager

Grade-II

on

03.02.2001,

respondent No.1 was not entitled for time bound

advancement on 05.02.2001. By virtue of the order dated

17.01.2015, the appellant has taken away the benefits

extended to respondent No.1 under resolution dated

26.11.2020. Respondent No.1 aggrieved by the resolution

dated

26.12.2014

filed

a

writ

petition

in

W.P.No.12029/2016. The learned Single Judge after

hearing both the parties, allowed the writ petition in part

and quashed the portion of recovery in a sum of

Rs.1,25,016/- under the office order dated 17.01.2015

and in all other relief sought by respondent No.1 stands

rejected. Respondent No.1 aggrieved by the portion of the

order, quashing the portion of recovery in a sum of

Rs.1,25,016/-, has filed this writ appeal. The appellant,

- 5 -

aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Single

Judge, has filed this writ appeal.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.

4.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that

the learned Singe Judge while rejecting the other prayer

sought by the petitioner would have allowed the writ

petition in part by quashing the portion of recovery in a

sum of Rs.1,25,061/-. He further submits that the

appellant has initiated a recovery proceedings immediately

i.e., within one month from the date of superannuation of

respondent No.1. He further submits that action of the

recovery of amount is well within time. He submits that

the learned Single Judge has committed an error in partly

allowing the writ petition. Hence on these grounds, he

prayed to allow the writ appeal.

5. Perused the records and considered the

submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant.

- 6 -

6.

Respondent No.1 was promoted to the cadre of

Assistant Manager to the cadre of Manager Grade-II vide

order dated 03.02.2001. Between the date of promotion

and date of reporting to duty, respondent No.1 sanctioned

time bound advancement by office order 05.02.2021 in the

cadre of Assistant Manager. Respondent No.1 accorded

permission to the next higher cadre of Manager Grade-II

on 03.02.2021 and subsequent to the promotion by the

office order dated 05.02.2001, the appellant could