Gopalan Nambiyar, C.J.

1. We regret our inability to share the view of the learned Judge, who allowed the writ petition, set aside Ext. P-9 order, and directed a writ of mandamus to the respondents in the writ petition to fix the petitioners salary and pension and allowances, treating the petitioners date of retirement as 21st November 1969. The writ petitioner (1st respondent before us) was compulsorily retired on 9th December 1966. The order of compulsory retirement was set aside by Ext. P-1 judgment of this court on 13th October 1969. By Ext. P-2 order dated 21st November 1969 the 1st respondent was reinstated in service. On the same date, an order was passed placing him under suspension. The said order has not been produced, but is available in the files. It was decided by the disciplinary authority to order an enquiry against the petitioner on the same facts and charges in respect of which the original order of compulsory retirement had been made. As a result of the fresh enquiry, by Ext. P-5 order dated 4th July 1970 the 1st respondent was ordered to be compulsorily retired with effect from 21st November 1969. Under rule 34 of the Kerala Civil Services (Classification,