JUDGMENT

Deepak Roshan, J. - Heard learned counsel for the parties through V.C.

2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner praying therein for quashing the charge-sheet issued under letter No.548 dated 18.02.2010 (Annexure-9) and also for quashing the letter No.1159 dated 03.05.2012; whereby the petitioner has been issued second show-cause notice as regards the report of the enquiry officer finding that the appointment of the petitioner was made irregular. Petitioner has also challenged the enquiry report dated 21.06.211 (Annexure11).

3. Mr. Rajeeva Sharma, learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that now since the petitioner has retired on 31.01.2018; as such the department cannot pursue with the departmental proceeding, inasmuch as, there is no charge of misconduct. He further submits that for any action to be taken after retirement there are provisions under Bihar Pension Rule and Rule 43(b) clearly stipulates that if there is misconduct or pecuniary loss to the government then only the said provision can be invoked.

In nutshell, Mr. Sharma argued that after retirement the respondent-State cannot continue with the departmental proceeding. He lastl