JUDGMENT :

Ravi R. Tripathi, J.

The present petition is filed by the petitioner – Dr.R.K.Khola, Senior Scientist/Engineer S.F. being aggrieved by judgment and order dated 04.04.2001 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench in O.A. No.407 of 1993.

1.1 The petitioner appeared Party-in-person and invited attention of the Court to the fact that he had filed Civil Application No.7493 of 2005 seeking amendment which was allowed by this Court by order dated 23.08.2005. Pursuant to that order, the petitioner has added the following prayer in this petition:-

"7(A), Be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order for quashing and setting aside the Constitution of the Review Committee and its decision (dated 22-12-1992 (Annexure at page 312 of the petition), the Constitution of Representation Review Committee and its decision dated 20-8-1993 (Annexure at page 313 of the petition) and the decisions of the Appointment Committee of the Cabinet dated 22-4-1993 (at Annexure A-1B) and dated 01-02-1994 (at Annexure A-1C). Further be pleased to quash and set aside the judgments of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad dated 04-4-2001 (at Annexure-A) and dated 31- 10-2001 (at Annexure A-1A) passed in O.A. No.407/93 and R.A. No.91/2001, respectively."

1.2 The petitioner has also prayed the following further reliefs:-

"7. (B) Consequent upon the grant of relief in above para (A), the petitioner prays for the following further reliefs:-

(i) Your Lordships may be pleased to quash and set aside the order of premature retirement of the petitioner and be pleased to declare the said order as absolutely illegal and bad, unconstitutional, null and void and that the petitioner continues in the service of the respondents as if the said order was never passed against the petitioner and to confer upon him all consequential benefits accordingly.

(ii) To declare the order of retirement dated 3.5.1993 (at Annexure A-10) of the OA) as arbitrary, illegal, violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and quash and set aside the same.

(iii) To declare the action of the respondents in rejecting the representation by passing the order dated 17.2.1994 (at Annex A-12 of the OA) as arbitrary, illegal, violative or Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and also rule FR 56(j) and to quash and set aside the same.

2. The petitioner - party-in-person filed O.A. No.407 of 1993 seeking the following reliefs:-

"(i) To quash and set aside the order of premature retirement dated 3.5.1993 (Annex. A-10) of the petitioner and be pleased to declare the said order as absolutely illegal and bad, unconstitutional, null and void and that the petitioner continues in the service of the respondents as if the said order was never passed against the petitioner and to confer upon him all consequential benefits accordingly.

(ii) To declare the action of the respondents in rejecting the representation by passing the order dated 17.2.1994 (Annexure A-12) as arbitrary, illegal, violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and also Rule 56(j) and to quash and set aside the same."

2.1 The Central Administrative Tribunal, after considering the rival, recorded from para-34 onwards as under:-

"34. So far as the present case is concerned while taking a decision to retire the applicant under FR 56(j), the authorities had not relied at all on the pendency of the disciplinary proceedings and this did not constitute or form back ground motive to the decision. It is also not the case here that the main reason for prematurely retiring the applicant is the pendency of the disciplinary proceedings and the levelling of the charges. The decision to prematurely retire the officer was taken on the basis of other materials. When there are deemed proceedings under Rule 9 of the C.C.S. (Pension) Rules the statutory rules set up a bar for release of gratuity (Rule 69(1) (c) of the C.C.S. (Pension) Rules) and for commu