Pramath Patnaik, J.

In the accompanied writ application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for direction upon the respondents to sanction and provide full pension, full gratuity, leave encashment after restoring two increments of the year 2011 and 2012 and for quashing of the impugned show cause notice dated 21.01.2014 issued under Rule 43(b) of the Jharkhand Pension Rule and also for quashing the order dated 20.03.2015 whereby an amount of 5 % from the pension amount of the petitioner is decided to be deducted/withheld.

2. Sans details, the facts as disclosed in the writ application is that the petitioner while posted as Executive Engineer, Water Ways Division, Hazaribagh, up-to the Financial Year 2006-07, construction of four numbers of building under Bhairwa Reservoir Scheme K-Building was sanctioned and the petitioner was directed to get the said work executed departmentally. It has been averred that in the light of the directions given by the competent authority, the petitioner authorized the Assistant Engineer of the concerned Division to do the work and the petitioner pursuant to a departmental order was given charge of Superintending Engineer. It has further been averred that after completion of the work, the accounts were sent for the audit to the Accountant General, Jharkhand, where a query was made regarding actual execution of the work. It has been averred that in the garb of the query made by the Accountant General (Audit), Jharkhand, a departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner, which culminated to imposition of punishment vide memo dated 07.09.2010 of stoppage of two annual increments with cumulative effect as well as the petitioner not to be deemed fit for promotion for two years from the date of entitlement. Being aggrieved, the petitioner moved before this Hon'ble Court by way of filing W.P. (S) No. 4058 of 2012, which was allowed vide order dated 07.05.2013 and the impugned order of punishment dated 07.09.2010 was quashed, however, liberty was given to the respondents to proceed afresh against the petitioner, if there is sufficient ground, in accordance with law.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner got superannuated on 30.04.2013 from the post of Chief Engineer and the petitioner is entitled to get arrears of salary so accrued in view of the quashing of punishment order dated 07.09.2010 and also the entire retiral benefits.

4. But to the utter surprise and dismay, instead of sanctioning and granting retirement benefits, after eight months of retirement, a show cause notice dated 21.01.2014 was issued by the respondents under Rule 43(b) of the Jharkhand Pension Rules. It has further been submitted that during pendency of the writ application, the respondents have passed a punishment order dated 20.03.2015, by which, 5 % amount from the pension of the petitioner is decided to be deducted.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order dated 20.03.2015 has been passed only after considering the enquiry report submitted by the enquiry officer and basing on the same enquiry report, the earlier order of punishment dated 7.09.2010 has been quashed by this Court vide order dated 5.5.2013 (Annexure 3). Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the impugned punishment dated 20.03.2015 is a major punishment and the procedure for imposing major punishment has not been followed in awarding the said punishment. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that there was a denial of right of representation to which the petitioner is entitled to in accordance with Rule 55 of the Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that show cause notice dated 21.01.2014 issued under Rule 43(b) of the Jharkhand Pension Rules issued on the point of punishment was per se illegal since order dated 20.03.2015 does not indicate that the reply to the said show cause not