Final dismissal of the State’s recovery suit renders the departmental recovery order arbitrary.

The petitioner, an in-charge Audit Officer on deputation, was subjected to an enquiry concerning alleged misappropriation of funds.

The enquiry officer found the charges proved against the petitioner and five others and recommended recovery; the petitioner was directed to pay ₹5,17,677 out of the total amount of ₹23,34,100

The Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal dismissed his challenge to the recovery order on 21 April 2017.

During the pendency of the writ petition, the State’s civil recovery suit, O.S. No. 88/2007, was dismissed against the petitioner by judgment dated 23 October 2017. The State confirmed that it had not appealed that dismissal.

The Court applied the principle that a court may take judicial note of a subsequent event arising during the pendency of proceedings where it bears on the relief sought.

It treated the civil court’s dismissal of the recovery suit against the petitioner, which the State had not appealed and which had therefore attained finality, as material to the validity of the administrative recovery order.

The Court noted that the departmental enquiry had resulted in findings against the petitioner and that the Tribunal had dismissed his challenge.

However, the later civil judgment dismissed the State’s recovery suit against him, and the State confirmed that it had not appealed that decision. Taking judicial note of this subsequent event, the Court concluded that the recovery order against the petitioner was arbitrary in light of the civil judgment’s finality.

The judgment cites no statute or precedent.