- (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) The respondent was retired on superannuation with effect from 31/5/198484. The order of his retirement was issued on 4/5/1984. He, however, immediately filed a writ petition before the High court and obtained an interim order staying retirement on 21/5/1984. In the writ petition, an order was passed on 26/12/1984 directing the appellant to hold a departmental enquiry for the purpose of determining the respondent's date of birth. The High court directed the respondent to serve till the finalisation of the enquiry. On 9/5/1986, the departmental enquiry gave its findings against the respondent holding that the correct date of birth had been entered in the service records.
(3.) The appellants have not paid any salary to the respondent from 26-12- 1984 to 9/5/1986. The respondent filed another writ petition in which the impugned order has been passed by the High court, directing payment of salary for the period 26/12/1984 to 9/5/1986. In the earlier petition, under the order dated 26/12/1984, the direction given to hold a fresh enquiry regarding the date of birth of the respondent was by consent of the parties. The prayer of the respondent for his salary for services rendered after the date of superannuation, however, was opposed by the appellant and the court had left this point to be settled by the competent authority. A letters patent appeal filed by the appellant was dismissed.;