Binod Kumar Roy, J.

1. in this writ application, in view of the sole question argued and pressed by Mr. S.P. Mukherjee, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, namely, that whether in view of the retirement of the petitioners from service during the pendency of this writ application the departmental proceeding against them can be continued? It is not necessary to extract facts from the bulky records of this writ application running into more than 250 pages.

2. The petitioners filed this writ application for quashing the order as contained in letter Nos. 5674 and 5675, dated 12th October, 1982 and in letter Nos. 6172 and 6173, dated 24th November, 1982 as contained in Annexure-1 series. In the said Annexures their employer the Patna Regional Development Authority (Respondent No.1) derected the petitioners to hand over possession of flat Nos. LF-1/55 and LF-1/58 situate in Rajendra Nagar, Police Station Kadam Kuan by 15th October, in refusal thereof to face their automatic suspension. The petitioners also challenge their suspension order dated 10th October 1983 as contained in Annexure 7-A and the charges as contained in Annexure-11 in a departmental proceeding initiat