- (1.) Heard Shri Pradeep Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Vikram Bahadur, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1,2 and 3 and Shri Vishnu Kumar, learned counsel for respondent No.4.
(2.) This writ petition has been filed praying for a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari to quash the order dated 11.07.2014 passed by the Respondent No.3 whereby the representation of the respondent No.4 for payment of post retirement benefits has been accepted.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.4 was dismissed from service on 15.10.03 by the appointing authority i.e., Principal of the Institution. The respondent No.4 had absented himself from duty for about three years since 1.1.2001 due to involvement in criminal cases and when this fact came to the knowledge of the Principal of the Institution, then a senior Assistant Teacher was appointed as enquiry officer and a charge sheet dated 13.7.2003 was served on the respondent No.4. The Enquiry Officer sent notices to the respondent No.4 but he did not respond and as such a report dated 10.10.03 was submitted by the Enquiry Officer which was accepted by the Principal of the Institution and service of the respondent No.4 was terminated by order dated 15.10.03. Therefore, the impugned order restoring the service of the respondent No.4 and treating him to had retired on 31.7.11 is illegal. He submits that in view of the Full Bench Judgment of this Court in the case of Rishikesh Lal Srivastava Versus State of U.P. & Others, 2010 1 AllLJ 630 prior approval or sanction from the respondent No.3 was not required while terminating the service of the respondent No.4, who was Class-IV employee of the Institution.;