SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 19931

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
S.R. Krishna Kumar, J
C.R. Padmanabha – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO. 28351 OF 2024 (S-RES)



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ramananda A.D.
For the Respondents: G. Ramesh Naik, Ajay J Nandalike, Swamini G Mohanambal, Sandeep Patil

State authorities must consider representations regarding the recovery of excess commuted pension amounts, and until such consideration is concluded, recovery action is stayed to prevent recurring financial loss to retirees.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227 - Recovery of commuted value of pension - Petitioners seeking direction to restrain authorities from recovering pension commutation amounts - Petitioners contend they have already paid beyond the mandatory period - Reliance placed on similar orders passed by co-ordinate Benches. (Paras 1, 3, 4)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners, retired employees of a power corporation, filed a writ petition seeking to restrain the state and state-undertaking respondents from recovering excess commuted pension amounts, claiming they have already completed recovery payments exceeding 10 years and 8 months. They requested a writ of mandamus for the refund of excess amounts and an interim stay on further deductions.

Findings of Court:
The Court observed that the controversy is squarely covered by a previous order of a co-ordinate Bench. It directed the petitioners to submit detailed representations and ordered the competent authority to dispose of them within a specified timeframe, granting an interim stay against recovery until the matter is decided.

Issues: Whether the state can continue to recover commuted pension amounts from retired employees after the expiry of the prescribed recovery period and whether a mandamus should be issued to refund the excess amount.

Ratio Decidendi: Following the doctrine of precedent and maintaining judicial consistency with coordinate Bench rulings in identical subject matter, the Court directed the respondents to consider the individual representations of the petitioners within 3 months and imposed a status quo on recovery actions in the interim.

Result: Petition disposed of.

Table of Content
1. mandatory consideration of retiree representations regarding pension recovery by statutory authorities. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)

ORAL ORDER

In this petition, petitioners have sought for the following reliefs;

i. To issue directions to Respondents to stay further recovery of portion of commutation of pension immediately, as the Petitioners is suffering recurring financial loss every month in pension who have paid more than 10 years and 8 months as per representation vide ANNEXURE-A dated 27-08-2024 which discloses the names of the Petitioners vide ANNEXURE-K.

ii. To Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to refund the excess amount of commutation of pension having already been recovered for the petitioners who have paid for 15 years instead of 10 years and 8 months as per the representation dated 27-08-2024 vide ANNEXURE-A which discloses the name of the Petitioners vide ANNEXURE-K.

iii. To Issue any other writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble High Court may deem fit and proper in view of the facts and circumstances of the case. Exempt the Petitioners from filling certified copies of ANNEXURE-D, ANNEXURE-F, ANNEXURE-G and ANNEXURE-J of Interim Orders passed by various other High Courts, viz Interim Order dated 21-08-2023 in CWP 9426/2023, CWP 16334/2023, CWP 9927/2023, CWP 11763/2023 of High Court of Punjab and Haryana vide ANNEXURE-D, Interim Order in WP 8222/2024 dated 15-04-2024 passed by High Court of Punjab and Haryana Vide ANNEXURE-F, Interim Order dated 08-08-2024 passed by High Court of Kerala staying the Recovery of Commutated value of Pension in WPC No.22753/2024 Vide ANNEXURE-G and Interim Order dated 23-09-2024 passed by High Court of State of Telangana in WPC NO.26042/2024 vide ANNEXURE-J in the Interest of justice.

iv. Exempt the petitioner from issuance of advance notices to the respondents, in the interest of justice, and

v. Award cost of the writ petition to the Petitioner in the interest of justice."

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for respondents and perused the material on record.

3. The issue in controversy is directly and squarely covered by the order passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.5625/2025 c/w W.P.No.23448/2024 and W.P.No.34844/2024 dated 12.01.2026, wherein it is held as under:

These writ petitions are filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

W.P.No.5625/2025:

“a) Restrain the Respondent State from recovering the excess commuted value of pension from the Petitioners as shown under Annexure B to B10.

b) To quash the Respondent Act of deducting the excess commuted value of pension of the Petitioners as evident from Annexure A to A10 and B to B10.

c) Direct the Respondent State to refund the excess amount recovered from petitioner along with future interest calculated at the rate of 9% from the date of recovery to till the date of realization.

d) Pass such other order or direction, this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the circumstance of the case.

W.P.No.23448/2024:

i) To issue directions to Respondents to stay further recovery of portion of commutation of pension immediately, as the Petitioners are suffering recurring financial loss every month in pension who have paid more than 10 years and 8 months as per representation vide ANNEXURE-A dated 01-07-2024 which discloses the names of the petitioners vide ANNEXURE-C.

ii. To Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to refund the excess amount of commutation of pension having already been recovered for the petitioners who have paid for 15 years instead of 10 years and 8 months as per the representation dated 01-07-2024 vide ANNEXURE-A which discloses the name of the Petitioners vide ANNEXURE-C.

iii. To Issue any other writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble High Court may deem fit and proper in view of the facts and circumstances of the case.

iv. Exempt the petitioner from filling certified copies of ANNE

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top