J.B. Pardiwala, J.

1. By this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:

"25(A) To issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the letter dated 11.9.2007 of the respondent No. 5 as also order passed by the respondent No. 1 dated 3.5.2006 bearing No. KAS/132004/1082(3)/K-9 (which was never served upon the present petitioner) withholding the pension of the petitioner for the reasons stated in the memo of petition.

(B) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of the above Special Civil Application to restrain the respondents, their agents and servants from withholding the pension of the present petitioner pursuant to the order passed by the respondent No. 1 dated 3.5.2006 and intimated to the petitioner by letter dated 11.9.2007 of the respondent No. 5 for the reasons stated in the memo of petition.

(c) The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other appropriate relief as the nature circumstances of the case may require.

(D) To award the cost of this petition."

2. The case of the writ applicant may be summarized as under:

2.1 The writ applicant joined the services of the respondent No. 2 on 21st February 1967 as a 'Heavy Vehicle Operator' in the Baroda Regional Office. It appears that he left the country after getting leave for seventy five days sanctioned. The leave was sanctioned for the period between 17th September 1984 and 30th November 1984. However, the writ applicant failed to return and resume his service. The department came to know that the writ applicant had settled himself at Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, for the purpose of employment.

2.2 A departmental charge-sheet was issued to the writ applicant on 4th September 1987 for remaining absent unauthorisedly. It appears that the writ applicant returned to India after three years i.e. in the year 1987.

2.3 An Inquiry Officer was appointed. The writ applicant virtually accepted the charge which was levelled against him of unauthorised absence without leave.

2.4 The disciplinary authority issued a show cause notice calling upon the writ applicant to show cause as to why his services should not be terminated for the misconduct which was virtually accepted.

2.5 By order dated 30th July 1992, the services of the writ applicant came to be terminated.

2.6 Being dissatisfied, the writ applicant preferred an appeal bearing No. 462 of 1992 before the Gujarat Civil Services Tribunal. The said appeal was withdrawn on the ground that the writ applicant wanted to prefer a representation before the Director of Agriculture.

2.7 The writ applicant, thereafter, preferred a representation addressed to the respondent No. 2. The respondent No. 2 vide order dated 10th September 1996 modified the order of penalty by substituting the same from dismissal to compulsory retirement.

2.8 It appears that despite such order being passed, pension was sanctioned on 16th September 1997. It appears that one fine day i.e. almost after a period of about ten years, the authority realized that the writ applicant was not entitled to regular pension as the penalty of compulsory retirement by way of punishment was imposed in the departmental inquiry. According to the authority, at best, the writ applicant would be entitled to the compassionate pension in accordance with the Pension Regulations 2002.

2.9 All of a sudden, the pension was stopped without giving any opportunity of hearing to the writ applicant and also without passing an appropriate order in that regard.

2.10 Hence, this writ application.

3. On 24th January 2008, the following order was passed:

"Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the pension, which was sanctioned in the year 1997, was abruptly stopped by the impugned order dated 11.9.2007 without issuing show cause notice and without hearing the petitioner.

Rule.

Interim relief in terms of paragraph 25(B). D.S. Permit