GOVIND MATHUR ,J. - (1.) THIS petition for writ is placed before the Court for its disposal in the spirit of Lok Adalat, however, counsel for the parties desire to get the same adjudicated on merits.
(2.) FACTS of the case, necessary to be noticed are that the Collector, Banswara by an order dated 15.3.2001, while exercising powers under Rule 53(1) of the Rajasthan Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1996'), placed the petitioner under compulsory retirement. The order of compulsory retirement was reviewed by a competent committee constituted by the Government of Rajasthan and that vide order dated 31.3.2005 set aside the order dated 15.3.2001. However, while doing so the payment of wages for the period the government servant remained out of employment was denied to him, on basis of the principles of "no work no wages". In pursuance to the order dated 31.3.2005 the Collector, Banswara passed an another order dated 23.5.2005 reinstating the petitioner in service, but denying the wages for the period he remained out of employment. A direction was also given for depositing all the post retiral benefits availed by the petitioner with treasury. The petitioner, while joining service, made a protest regarding non payment of the wages for the period he remained out of employment. On having no positive action on part of the respondents, this petition for writ is preferred claiming the reliefs as under: - "(A) the orders dated 31st March, 2005 and 23.5.2005 (Annexures 2 and 3) imposing a condition that petitioner should join his duties within one month and that he should refund the retiral dues immediately be quashed and set aside; (B) that it may kindly further be directed that on account of suomoto setting aside the order of compulsory retirement dated 15.3.2001 petitioner is entitled to get wages for the period he has remained out of employment due to illegal order of compulsory retirement."
(3.) THE stand of the petitioner is that he was compulsorily retired as per Rule 53 of the Rules of 1996 and the order of compulsory retirement came to an end in pursuant to a decision taken by the review committee, as such the period in which he remained out of employment was due to an illegal action taken by the respondents, therefore, he cannot be penalised for that. It is further submitted that forfeiture of wages is a penalty prescribed under Rule 14 of the Rajasthan Civil Service (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958, and if the employer be permitted to detain the wages as per the order impugned, then that shall amount to imposing a penalty without following the due procedure.;