JUDGMENT

1. Shorn of unnecessary details, short facts relevant for determination of this Court in the present application are that on the allegation of certain misconduct a disciplinary proceeding was initiated against the petitioner which culminated into passing of an order of dismissal from service dated 29.02.2008, by the Disciplinary Authority. The petitioner's appeal before the Appellate Authority and mercy petition before the Director General of Police, Bihar were also rejected.

2. The petitioner, at the relevant point of time, was posted in Patna Rail Police. A complain that he was demanding illegal money for allowing passengers to board a train, was the basis for initiating the said disciplinary proceeding against him. Aggrieved by the decision of the Disciplinary Authority, Appellate Authority and the order passed by the Director General of Police, Bihar the petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing writ petition giving rise to CWJC No. 9438 of 2011. The writ petition was partly allowed by an order dated 10.12.2013 in following terms :-

"15. As the charge of demanding money which is one of the two charges is not proved against the petitioner the matter is remitted for fresh consideration on quantum of sentence. It would be open for respondents to inflict any punishment including one of compulsory retirement or any other punishment without prejudice. In the result, the impugned order of dismissal passed by Superintendent of Police, Rail as well as appellate orders of the DIG and the Director General of Police are set aside and the matter is remanded to the respondents for passing afresh order in accordance with law. The position existing immediately prior to dismissal order is restored. (Underlined for emphasis)

3. It is evident from the observation made by this Court in the order dated 10.12.2013 that in the Court's opinion the charge of demanding money could not be proved against the petitioner. The matter was remanded back to the Disciplinary Authority for consideration on quantum of punishment. This Court had pointed out that it would be open for the respondents to inflict any punishment including one of the compulsory retirement. The Court had further ordered that the position existing immediately prior to dismissal order would stand restored.

4. Admittedly, by virtue of the order of this Court dated 10.12.2013, passed in CWJC No. 9438 of 2011, the petitioner was required to be reinstated in service with effect from the date of his dismissal.

5. This is not in dispute that after filing of the contempt application, the Director General of Police issued an order dated 29.09.2015 imposing punishment of compulsory retirement in place of dismissal, but to be effective from a retrospective date i.e. the date of the order of dismissal (29.02.2008).

6. The State of Bihar has preferred a Letters Patent Appeal registered as LPA No. 1875 of 2015 against this Court's order dated 10.12.2013, passed in CWJC No. 9438 of 2011, which is said to be pending. The Director General of Police in his order dated 29.09.2015 has recorded that the said order shall be subject to outcome of the Letters Patent Appeal preferred against the said order of this Court dated 10.12.2013. In compliance of the order of the Director General of Police dated 29.09.2015 the Superintendent of Police (Railway) Patna has passed order of the same date i.e. 29.09.2015 communicating punishment of compulsory retirement from the date of dismissal from service of the petitioner.

7. This writ application has been filed, in the aforesaid background, seeking quashing of the two orders dated 29.05.2015, passed by the director General of Police, Bihar and the Superintendent of Police (Railway), Patna.

8. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State of Bihar.

9. I have heard Ms. Mahasweta Chatterjee, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Archana Meenakshee, learned counsel representing the State of Bihar.

10. Ms. Chatterjee, learned counsel appearing