B.D.Agarwal, J. - (1.) The petitioner was appointed a clerk in the Department of Civil Supplies, District Basti The date of birth of the petitioner is July 1, 1916 On August 15, 1973 the petitioner was placed under suspension by an order of the District Magistrate, Basti, which stated that this was being done in pursuance of the direction received from the State Government dated 13th August. 1973 a charge-sheet was served upon the petitioner thereafter under the signatures of the Additional Food Commissioner (Enquiry Officer) and it is dated April 24, 1974. The petitioner submitted his reply to the charge sheet on May 8, 1974. On December 16, 1974 the District Magistrate, Basti made an order stating that the petitioner is to be deemed as retired with effect from the forenoon of July 1, 1974, having attained the age of superannuation, namely, 58 years. The petitioner had a claim before the Public Service Tribunal under Section 4 of the U P. Public Services Tribunal Act, 1976 claiming that he could not be retired despite having attained the age of superannuation until the enquiry against him was completed. The claim was dismissed by the Tribunal and aggrieved against that order the petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner urged that the petitioner attained the age of superannuation on June 30, 1974. The suspension was directed against him by the appointing authority on 15th August, 1973, acting in pursuance of a directive received from the State Government dated 13th August, ['ill. The charge-sheet came to he served long afterwards on April 24, 1974. There is no indication from the record that the enquiry was continued beyond the due of retirement of the petitioner or that the enquiry has been concluded and the decision taken against him in that proceedings. The contention raised is that the suspension directed against the petitioner was under the circumstances unjustified and that he is entitled in any case, to receive the salary that could have seen admissible to him for the period during which he remained suspended prior to the said retirement.
(3.) There can be no denial of the fact that had the enquiry proceeded beyond the date of retirement, there would have been a specific order made to the effect that the petitioner be retained in service even though he had attained the age of 58 years. It is also settled that the retirement on attaining the age of superannuation is automatic and it does not stand in need of an order being passed to that effect. The order of retirement even though passed on 16tii of December, 19/4, is superfluous because despite the passing of an express order made in or about June, 1974, the petitioner did retire with effect from June 30, 1974. The only question surviving is with regard to the claim of emoluments for the period during 15th August, 1973 to 10th of June 1974. The contention in that behalf is that the charge-sheet Was served long after the petitioner had been placed under suspension on the direction of the State Government and that there is no material placed on the record to satisfy that the Distinct Magistrate had enough for reasonable basis for putting the petitioner under suspension during the pendency of the enquiry. It is not indicated, as 1 mentioned above, that the enquiry relating to the charges drawn against the petitioner led to some tangible result. A perusal of the charges as contained in the charge-sheet dated 24th April, 1974 would itself show that this was vague on the face of it and the petitioner did submit his explanation of the same on 8th of May, 1974. There is no indication that the averments contained in the explanation to the said charge-sheet was found to be untenable or without basis. Reference in this connection has also been made to an unreported decision of a learned Single Judge of this Court in writ petition No. 2552 of 1975 Muzharul Haq v. State of U P., decided on 4th September, 1975 wherein almost in similar circumstances the order of suspension passed against the petitioner was held to be unjustified.;