Rajiv Sharma, J.-Petitioner was appointed as Peon in Revenue Department. He submitted an application, seeking voluntary retirement on 22.12.1976 (Annexure A-1). He was directed to complete the pension papers on any working day as per communication dated 17th January, 1977 (Annexure A-2). Petitioner submitted various representations to the authorities for considering his case for pension. His case was ultimately rejected by the competent authority on 31.07.1989 (Annexure A-12).

2. Mrs. Ranjana Parmar, learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that her client was entitled to get pension on the basis of Annexure A-2, dated 17th January, 1977. She has further contended that once her client has been permitted to retire prematurely on the basis of Annexures A-1, dated 22.12.1976 and A-2, dated 17th January, 1977, thereafter, no departmental proceedings could be initiated against him.

3. Mr. Rajinder Dogra, learned Additional Advocate General has vehemently argued that the petitioner has willfully absented from 01.05.1972 and thereafter, the departmental proceedings were initiated against him. He was removed from service on 12.05.1978.

4. I have heard the learned