JUDGMENT :

DEEPAK ROSHAN, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties through V.C.

2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner for following reliefs:

(i) A direction upon the respondents to pay the salary for the period between 1.9.1985 to 5.9.1985, arrear for the period between January 1987 to March 1993, pension and other benefits as held payable to the petitioner vide reasoned order passed by the respondent no. 3 and communicated to the petitioner vide letter no. BCCL:EE:X:C:2008:299 dated 7.3.2008 (Annexure-9).

(ii) For quashing letter bearing no. BCCL:EE:X:C:2008:299 dated 7.3.2008 (Annexure-9) to the extent wherein it has been held that the petitioner is not entitled to the payment of monetary benefits from 22.06.1999 till date of his superannuation i.e. 30.4.2005 and further that the petitioner is not entitled to the payment of salary and consequential benefit for the period 22.06.1999 to 30.4.2005, he shall not be entitled to promotion nor monetary benefits and further to the extent wherein it has been held that the petitioner is not entitled for Non Practicing Allowance (NPA) and arrears for the period between July 1999 to 30.4.2005.

(iii) For a direction upon the respondents to pay LTC & LLTC during the period between 22.06.1999 to 30.04.2005, payment of leave encashment and bonus for the period under dismissal (22.06.1999 to 30.04.2005) which though had been claimed by the petitioner, however no order to that effect has been passed by the respondent no. 3 in his reasoned order passed vide BCCL:EE:X:C:2008:299 dated 7.3.2008 (Annexure-9) and or pass any such orders/directions as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interests of justice.

3. The admitted facts of the instant case is that the petitioner was dismissed from service on 22.06.1999 on account of his conviction in R.C. Case No. 16/85 (D) and R.C. Case No. 17/85 (D) by a judgment dated 08.05.1997 passed by the learned Special Judge, CBI, Dhanbad. Subsequently, the petitioner preferred criminal appeals being Cr. Appeal No. 94/97 (R) and Cr. Appeal No. 95/97 (R) before this Court. The above referred criminal appeals were allowed by this Court by judgment dated 31.07.2006. However, before the order of acquittal could be passed by the Appellate Court, the petitioner had attained the age of superannuation on 30.04.2005.

4. Mr. Mrinal Kanti Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the representation of the petitioner was disposed of whereby certain amounts under different heads were allowed by the respondent authorities; however the same has not yet been paid, for which he has given several representation and reminders requesting them to make payment in terms of Annexure-9 to the writ application. He further submits that he is also otherwise entitled for all back wages etc. during the intervening period from the date of dismissal i.e. 22.06.1999 till the date of superannuation i.e. on 30.4.2005. He further submits that it is not the department who initiated any departmental proceeding or dismissed the petitioner from service rather it was on account of two criminal case instituted by CBI; as such, pursuant to the acquittal the petitioner is entitled for the entire payment from the date of dismissal till the date of retirement.

5. Mr. A.K. Mehta, learned counsel for the respondent at the outset opposes the contention of the petitioner on the ground of delay and latches. He further submits that the petitioner was dismissed on 22.06.1999 and he was acquitted by this Court on 31.07.2006, however, he has challenged the order of termination after a delay of 12 years from the date of removal that too by way of amendment application. He further submits that so far as the first grievance of the petitioner is concerned with regard to nonpayment of admitted amount as per Annexure-9; he draws attention of this Court towards Para 20 and 22 of the counter-affidavit, wherein it has been specificall