Shiv Kumar Sharma, J. - (1.) THE petitioner while serving as Upper Division Clerk in the Board of Revenue was convicted under Section 302 read with 34 IPC by learned Sessions Judge vide judgment dated 29.6.1981 that was ultimately confirmed by the Supreme Court on 22.8.1991. The petitioner on attaining the age of superannuation was retired on 31.10.1987 and till retirement the petitioner remained under suspension and was regularly paid subsistence allowance. After about 10 years of retirement i.e. on 10.9.1997 respondent Board of Revenue passed and order terminating the service of the petitioner retrospectively w.e.f. 29.6.1981.
(2.) IN the instant writ petition the petitioner seeks to quash the said order dated 10.9.1997 with a further prayer to allow him the benefits of pension, gratuity and other retiral benefits. The respondents submitted return to the writ petition stating therein that the services of the petitioner were rightly terminated retrospectively and he was not entitled to retiral benefits.
(3.) MR . Ajeet Bhandari, learned counsel for the petitioner, canvassed that the services of petitioner could not have been terminated after ten years of his retirement retrospectively. There is no provision in the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 (for short 'CCA Rules') to punish a retired employee. As no order was passed withholding retiral benefits the same could not be withheld. Reliance is placed on R. Jeevaratnam v. : (1967)ILLJ391SC , The PSEB Patiala v. Gurpal Singh Bhamra,, 1989 (4) SLR 19; Punjab State Electricity Board v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court and Anr.,, 1992 (5) SLR 285 and State of Karnataka v. R.S. Naik,, 1983 (3) SLR 285.;