ANJANI KUMAR, J. - (1.) PETITIONER , by means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has challenged the order dated 23rd August, 2002, passed by the respondent No. 4, a copy whereof is annexed as Annexure -'21' to the writ petition, whereby the respondent No. 4 has deducted an amount of Rs. 1,72,779.50.
(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner has filed an application for amendment wherein he has sought for to add para No. 26 -A and ground No. V, which are reproduced below : (26 -A) That an amount of Rs. 1,72,779.50 was recovered by respondent No. 3 at the advice of respondent Nos. 2 and 4 from the pension, gratuity, rashikaran etc., due to the petitioner after retirement without any notice or information to the petitioner which is just contrary to the natural justice and Constitution of India. (V) Because the recovery of an amount of Rs. 1,72,779.50 from the pension and gratuity etc. due to the petitioner was made without any notice and information by respondents illegally and unlawfully and liable to be quashed and undone. The facts leading to the filing of present writ petition are that the petitioner, who was working with the Collector, Mainpuri, was informed that he will be retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 30th June, 1993. This order was passed on 30th June, 1993 itself. The petitioner had challenged the aforesaid order by means of Writ Petition No. Nil of 1993 before this Court in which this Court was pleased to grant the following interim order on 7th July, 1993 : Issue notice. Until further orders of this Court, operation of the impugned order dated 30th June, 1993 shall remain stayed.
(3.) THE petitioner communicated the aforesaid order passed by this Court before the authority concerned, pursuant to which, according to the petitioner, he was allowed to work on his post from where he was superannuated on 30th June, 1993. The aforesaid writ petition No. Nil of 1993 (subsequently numbered as Writ Petition No. 23191 of 1993) came up for hearing before this Court and was dismissed vide its judgment and order dated 14th October, 1997. Against the judgment and order dated 14th October, 1997, petitioner filed Special Appeal No. 977 of 1997, which was also dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court vide its judgment and order dated 15th May, 2000 and the judgment of learned single Judge was affirmed by Division Bench of this Court. Petitioner thereafter preferred a Special Leave Petition before Hon'ble Supreme Court, which too was dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 27th September, 2000. The judgment of learned single Judge, which was passed after exchange of counter and rejoinder -affidavits, learned single Judge has recorded findings in the following words: On consideration of all the materials, I find that original entry was 10 -6 -1935. While making interpolation the entire entry in words could not be altered to make it 6 -7 -1939 and only alteration made was in respect of the year. This also explains the discrepancy as to why entry in service records was not tallying with other records produced by the petitioner in support of his claim. Categorical contention of the respondents that the petitioner played fraud and deliberately entered his date of birth in the High School Examination form as 6 -7 -1939, have not been even denied in the rejoinder -affidavit. In view of the materials available, the case of the respondents is acceptable. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has rendered services for subsequent period by virtue of an interim order of this Court and as such no recovery should be made with regard to the salary paid to the petitioner for the said period. In the facts of the present case, it appears that the petitioner obtained said relief from this Court suppressing the relevant facts, which have subsequently been disclosed in the counter -affidavit and as such the writ petitioner obtained relief by way of interim order on suppression of material facts. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief to the aforesaid extent in particular facts of the present case. Accordingly, this writ petition fails and the same is hereby dismissed. There will be no order as to costs. ;