P.K. LOHRA, J. - (1.) THIS legal battle was launched at the behest of a compulsorily retired judicial officer for assailing the impugned order dated 31st of March 2010 (An- nex.9), and after his unfortunate demise in Ut- trakhand Gory Tragedy, is pursued by his legal representatives.
(2.) SCORNING the checkered history of the case, the brief facts giving rise to this litigation are that at the threshold of his judicial career, the petitioner was appointed as Munsif & Judicial Magistrate vide order dated 16th of July 1980 under Rule 21 of the Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules 1955 (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1955'). Pursuant to order dated 16th July 1980, the peti- tioner joined his duties on 29th of July 1980 and was made substantive on the post of Munsif & Ju- dicial Magistrate vide order dated 11th April 1983 w.e.f. 29th of July 1982. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Civil Judge cum Addi- tional Chief Judicial Magistrate in the RJS cadre vide order dated 26th May 1993. However, subse- quently, the date of grant of selection scale was altered and made effective from an anterior date i.e. 7th September 1992 vide order dated 6th Au- gust 2001. In adherence of the Resolution of the Full Court, the petitioner was allowed Selection Scale in RJS Cadre w.e.f. 11th May 1994, followed by Super Time Scale in RJS cadre w.e.f. 4th of April 1998 on the basis of merit vide order dated 25th of June 1999. The petitioner earned another promotion in the Rajasthan High Judicial Services cadre as Addi- tional District & Sessions Judge vide order dated 2nd of June 2000 and after rendering seven years' services in the RHJS cadre, granted Selection Scale vide order dated 13th of June 2007 w.e.f. 1st On 31st of March 2010, the peti- of March 2006. tioner was compulsorily retired under Rule 53(1) of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules 1996 (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1996'), which order was served on the petitioner on 4th of April 2010. The petitioner has averred in the writ petition that the order of com- pulsory retirement was accompanied by a Banker's Cheque bearing No.846463 dated 6th of April 2010 for a sum of Rs.2,20,875 i.e. three months' pay and allowances in lieu of notice as postulated under Rule 53(2) of the Rules of 1996. As per the version of the petitioner, as a conse- quence of his revision in the pay scale in accor- dance with the recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission w.e.f. 1st January 2006, he was not paid three months' pay and allowances as per re- vised pay scales. On receipt of the Banker's Cheque, the petitioner addressed a communica- tion to the second respondent on 26th of May 2010 and in adherence of his communication, the differ- ence amount of three months' pay and allowances was paid to him in the month of September 2010. Before receiving the difference amount, according to the petitioner, a communication was sent to the second respondent on 16th of June 2010 that he is depositing the said amount towards notice under Rule 53(2) of the Rules of 1996 alongwith order of compulsory retirement under protest while reserving his right to challenge the order of compulsory retirement.
(3.) IT is, inter-alia, pleaded in the writ petition that on;