ORDER :

1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner questioning the validity of the communication dated 30/6/2023 (Annex.10) and order dated 13/7/2023 (Annex.12), whereby, the petitioner has been issued a charge sheet under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Service (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 (‘the Rules 1958’) and the Additional District Collector (Administration), Chittorgarh has sent a communication to SDO, Gangrar, whereby, the memorandum of charges has been sent to the petitioner.

2. It is inter alia indicated in the petition that the petitioner was served with the charge sheet dated 27/8/2018 under Rule 17 of the Rules, 1958, which was responded to by the petitioner; the proceedings remained pending.

3. On 22/3/2022, the petitioner submitted a representation requesting the disciplinary authority to drop the pending charge sheet. While no order was passed, on 24/3/2023 (Annex.5) a notice was issued to the petitioner calling upon him to submit explanation with regard to the proposed inquiry under Rule 16 of the Rules, 1958 by the District Collector, Nagaur. The petitioner submitted his explanation on 3/5/2023 (Annex.6) denying all the charges. On 5/5/2023, a communication was received by the petitioner requiring him to respond to the notice (Annex.5), which he had already responded.

4. It is then submitted that on 15/6/2023 (Annex.8) an order was issued indicating that the petitioner is due to retire on 30/6/2023, no inquiry under Rule 16 of the Rules, 1958 was pending against him, no other proceedings under Rule 19 of the Rules, 1958 were pending against him and that no judicial proceedings were pending against him.

5. On 30/6/2023 (Annex.9), an order was passed by the District Collector, Chittorgarh indicating that on completing the age of superannuation i.e. 60 years, the petitioner is retired from service on 30/6/2023 afternoon.

6. However, to the utter surprise of the petitioner, on the last day of his retirement at 7.21 pm, a charge sheet was issued under Rule 16 of the Rules, 1958 to the petitioner, which was sent to him on whatsapp at 8.30 pm and the hard copy was in fact served on him by the District Collector on 10/7/2023, which is reflected from Annex.12.

7. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that action of the respondents in issuing the charge sheet to the petitioner after his retirement on 30/6/2023 afternoon is ex facie contrary to the provisions of Rule 7 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 (‘the Rules 1996’) and as such, the entire action stands vitiated and the charge sheet deserves to be quashed and set aside.

8. Submissions were made that as admittedly the petitioner was retired on 30/6/2023 afternoon, issuance of charge sheet at 7.21 pm i.e. after office hours is clearly after the petitioner stood retired and, therefore, the case of the petitioner would be governed by the provisions of Rule 7(2)(b) of the Rules, 1996, which clearly stipulate that the departmental proceedings, if not instituted while the government servant was in service, whether before his retirement or during his reemployment, the same cannot be instituted without the sanction of the Governor and the same cannot be in respect of any event which took place more than four years before such institution.

9. It is submitted that though the departmental proceedings have been instituted after the retirement of the petitioner, as sanction from the Governor has not been sought, the charge sheet is bad.

10. Further submissions have been made that a bare look at the charge sheet would reveal that the allegations pertain to the period 13/2/2017 to 26/7/2018, as the same are in respect of the events which took place more than four years before 30/6/2023 and, therefore, on both the counts the charge sheet being contrary to the provisions of Rule 7(2)(b)(i) & (ii) of the Rules, 1996, the same deserves to be quashed and set aside.

11. Learned counsel emphasized that as the petitioner has been reti