Dr Rathnamma v. Karnataka State Agricultural Marketing Board

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 16404 OF 2026 (S-RES) BETWEEN: DR. RATHNAMMA W/O SRI. RAMACHANDRA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, RETIRED GENERAL MANAGER, KARNATAKA STATE AGRICULTURAL MARKETING BOARD, AND RESIDING AT NO.477, "SRI SANNIDHI", 1ST CROSS, SHUBHODAYA ROAD, NEAR OIL MILL, MARATHAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 037. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. M. SUBRAHMANYA BHAT, ADVOCATE) AND:

¶1KARNATAKA STATE AGRICULTURAL MARKETING BOARD, NO. 16, 2ND RAJBHAVAN ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001, REPRESENTED THE MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶2THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA STATE AGRICULTURAL MARKETING BOARD, AND DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY, NO. 16, 2ND RAJBHAVAN ROAD, by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. T. SWAROOP, ADVOCATE)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE IMPUGNED NOTICE AND GRANT THE FOLLOWING RELIEFS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO SETTLE ALL TERMINAL BENEFITS SUCH AS MONTHLY PENSION, COMMUTATION OF PENSION, DCRG, EL ENCASHMENT AND GROUP INSURANCE ALONG WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 8 PERCENT PER ANNUM FROM 1.6.2020 TILL THE DATE OF ACTUAL PAYMENT, TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER The present petition is filed by the employee seeking for a direction for settlement of all terminal benefits such as monthly pension, commutation of pension, DCRG, earned leave encashment, and group insurance along with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from 01.06.2020 till date of actual payment.

¶2The case of the petitioner is that certain departmental proceedings were initiated against the petitioner, and the validity of such proceedings was challenged in W.P.No.7017/2021.

¶3It is further submitted that the said petition came to be allowed on 05.12.2022. The said enquiry proceedings came to be remitted for further proceedings from the stage of examining the witnesses.

¶4It is further submitted that thereafter, on

11.11.2025, the enquiry against the petitioner was concluded, and the petitioner was exonerated of all the charges. Thereafter, petitioner has made a representation to respondent No.2 to furnish a copy of the report and settle all terminal benefits payable. Respondent No.2 has issued an endorsement stating that the superannuation benefits would be settled only after the conclusion of the investigation by the Enforcement Directorate against one Sri. Siddhagangaiah, who is working as a Deputy General Manager in the same institution. All of these facts are not disputed by the respondents.

¶5The statement of objections filed by the respondents is to the effect that departmental enquiry was

conducted only in respect of the rejection of duty and there was criminal investigation being conducted by the Enforcement Directorate, in which, investigation is not yet complete and accordingly, the Court was of the opinion that the benefits ought to be settled after investigation is completed and in light of the said stand, the endorsement at Annexure-C came to be issued.

¶6Learned counsel appearing for the respondents reiterates that, in the event there is any financial loss to the institution, they would like to proceed against the petitioner's entitlement, and accordingly, Annexure-C has been passed.

¶7Heard the learned counsel for both sides.

¶8The challenge of the petitioner is as regards Annexure-C in which Karnataka State Agricultural Marketing Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board' for short) has taken the decision that the investigation by the Enforcement Directorate is still pending against one Sri. Siddagangaiah and after which decision would be taken

regarding the release of 50% of monetary benefits which has been withheld.

¶9Admittedly, the petitioner has been exonerated in the disciplinary proceedings and such aspect is not in dispute. The registration of an FIR and investigation by Enforcement Directorate is a separate aspect. The monetary benefits consequent to superannuation cannot be withheld on mere ground of pendency of investigation pursuant to a FIR lodged. It is necessary to notice that the petitioner herein has not yet been named as an accused.

¶10Taking note that Departmental Enquiry conducted by a retired District Judge has lead to exoneration of the petitioner, the resolution of the Board as indicated at Annexure-C is set aside. Respondent No.2 is directed to release all other monetary benefits which have been withheld as is due to the petitioner.

¶11Petitioner to execute an Indemnity Bond to the effect that upon findings and orders that may be passed in pending criminal proceedings if there is provision to proceed against the petitioner for recovery of monetary loss caused, the

petitioner would abide by such legally enforceable orders and directions.

¶12Accordingly, the petition is disposed of directing respondent No.2 to release the monetary benefits withheld subject to Indemnity Bond to be executed and in terms of the observations made above.

¶13The terminal benefits to be disbursed to the petitioner within a period not later than three (3) months from today.

I.A.No.1/2026 is disposed of as not calling for separate orders in light of disposal of the petition. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE GJM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31