C.L. SONI, J.

1. The petitioner has made following prayers under para 7 in his petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India:-

(A) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to admit and allow this petition.

(B) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to hold that the action of the respondents, unconstitutional and suffers from malafide and the prolonged inquiry was in violation and in breach of this Hon’ble High Court’s order dated 14.10.2002 in Special Civil Application No. 7721 of 2002 (Annexure ‘D’) and order dated 29.08.2003 in Special Civil Application No. 12580 of 2003 (Annexure ‘E’) and be pleased to further set aside the same as the punishment is disproportionate to the alleged charges.

(C) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside the order of compulsory retirement passed by respondent no. 2 bearing No. Kh.T.P./142002/1512/E dated 10th September 2009 passed by respondent no. 2 (Annexure ‘A’).

(D) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to reinstate the petitioner on the post originally held by the petitioner from the date on which he was suspended in July 2002 till the date of his alleged compulsory retirement vide order bearing No. Kh.T.P./142002/1512/E dated 10th September 2009 passed by respondent no. 2 (Annexure ‘A’) with all consequential benefits, such as, increments, pay and allowances, retiral benefits as are applicable to regular employees, including the effect of Sixth Pay Commission benefits, as if the petitioner had never been placed under suspension, with interest accrued on such amounts from the date when the amount became due till its actual realization.

(E) Pending admission hearing and final disposal of the present petition, this Hon’ble Court be pleased to stay order No. Kh.T.P./142002/1512/E dated 10th September 2009 passed by respondent no. 2 (Annexure ‘A’).

(F)……………..”

2. The case of the petitioner is that looking to his services rendered as Beat Supervisor (Kelavani) from 1979 onwards, he came to be appointed as Principal, DIET (i.e. equivalent to Deputy Director) by order dated 9.8.1997. He has averred that initially, he was appointed for a period of six months, but he was continued in service without any break till he was suspended in the month of July 2002 and departmental inquiry was initiated against him. He made representation against his suspension and requested for necessary documents as regards the allegations levelled against him. However since nothing was done, he preferred Special Civil Application No. 7721 of 2002 before this Court, wherein this Court vide order dated 14.10.2002 directed the respondents to supply copies of the documents which were to be relied by the department and to complete the inquiry within six months. It is further case of the petitioner that since the respondents failed to comply with the direction issued in the above petition, the petitioner again filed Special Civil Application No. 12580 of 2003, wherein the Court vide order dated 29.8.2003 directed the respondents to complete the inquiry latest by 31.12.2003. Thereafter also, the said direction was not complied with by the respondents and the suspension of the petitioner was continued for about 7 years. The petitioner has averred that though there is no substance in the allegations levelled against him, the respondents have taken decision of issuing order of compulsory retirement to the petitioner.

3. I have heard learned advocates for the parties.

4. Learned advocate Mr. K.B. Pujara appearing with learned advocate Mr. Hashim Qureshi for the petitioner submitted that for no good reason, the inquiry was delayed for about 7 years for the trivial charges which are not supported by any legal evidence. Mr. Pujara submitted that though this Court twice directed the respondents to complete the inquiry within six months and since not completed, to complete by 31.12.2003, the respondents deliberately did not conclude the inquiry just to see that the petitioner is put to lot of agony of such pe