- (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) The petitioner's services were terminated vide order dated 13.12.1994, which was challenged by the petitioner before this Court by means of Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 1977 of 1994. The writ petition was admitted on 15.3.2004 and during pendency of the writ petition an interim order was passed staying the order of termination. However, when the writ petition came up for final hearing, learned Counsel for the petitioner made a statement that as during pendency of the writ petition the petitioner superannuated and retired on 31.1.1996, hence relief sought for in the writ petition could not be granted to the petitioner. However, an oral prayer was made that retiral benefits be given. The Court vide order dated 15.3.2004, on the basis of the statement given by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, dismissed the writ petition with the direction to the petitioner to file a representation before the District Magistrate for retiral benefits which shall be decided within the time bound period. Pursuant to the aforesaid direction the representation made was decided by the District Magistrate on 23.2.2005. The claim was not accepted. The order dated 23.2.2005 has been challenged by the appellant by means of writ petition in Writ Petition No. 17210 of 2010 giving rise to the present appeal. Learned single Judge had dismissed the writ petition on the ground that so far as the termination has not been set aside the appellant is not entitled for retiral benefits like pension, gratuity etc. We do not find any legal infirmity in the order passed by the learned single Judge.
(3.) The special appeal fails and is dismissed.;