Hon’ble Amitava Lala, J.—This special appeal is arising out of the judgement and order dated 22nd April, 2003 passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 33047 of 2002 (H.N. Srivastava v. Food Corporation of India and others), thereby allowing the writ petition in favour of the respondent-writ petitioner.

2. The main contention of the respondent-writ petitioner is that inspite of none of the charges as levelled against him having been proved before the enquiry officer except some irregularities in properly recording details on the concerned register and the stock stored at various places of depot, the disciplinary authority passed an order dated 21st May, 2002 reverting the respondent-writ petitioner from the post of AG-I to AG-II (D) and also imposed penalty to the tune of Rs. 1,99,897/- on account of pecuniary loss. Such order of reversion was challenged by filing writ petition before the learned Single Judge, when upon hearing the parties the Court was pleased to allow the writ petition and quash the order dated 21st May, 2002 passed by the authority concerned. Such order of learned Single Judge dated 22nd April, 2003 is impugned in this appeal.

3. This appeal was preferred on 22nd May, 2003 and on 23rd May, 2003 upon hearing learned Counsel for the parties a Division Bench of this Court has stayed the operation of the order of learned Single Judge dated 22nd April, 2003 with a liberty to file an application for vacation, variation or extension of the order. Hence, the order of reversion was in operation. Respondent-writ petitioner was allowed to work as AG-II (D) for a period of four years. The tenure of four years was to expire in May, 2006. However, when the respondent-writ petitioner was working as AG-II (D), he was compulsorily retired in the year 2004 in another departmental proceeding vide order dated 26th October, 2004 arising out of selfsame incident. Neither he has challenged such order in any civil proceeding nor in the writ proceeding. Additionally, he has received his full retiral benefits i.e. leave encashment, gratuity, contributory provident fund, etc. after his retirement in 2004 itself. No dues are pending. However, the appellant Corporation has recovered amount of alleged loss i.e. Rs. 1,99,897/- as penalty from the salary of the delinquent.

4. It appears to us that scope of dispute at this stage is limited to that extent in view of the facts that the respondent-writ petitioner continued in service as AG-II (D) pursuant to stay order of the Division Bench and has been subjected to compulsory retirement, which was given effect to with benefits.

5. We have gone through the records and found that though the charges are moulded but it appears that the orders of reversion and compulsory retirement are more or less arising out of the similar incident. In both the cases i.e. reversion and compulsory retirement, the article of charges are as follows:

Article of Charges in the case of reversion:

“ARTICLE NO. I:

He misappropriated 89 bags weighing 83-50-000 Qtls. wheat at Mandi Yard Gola from stock No. R/2/1. He caused financial loss of Rs. 33,577/- (@ Rs. 402/- per Qntl) in connivance with Shri Mohd. Ubaid, AG-II (D) for his personal gain.

ARTICLE NO. II:

He misappropriated 6409 bags = 6412.94.000 Qtls. wheat during 1-4-95 to 30-6-96 valuing Rs. 25,78,001.18 (@ Rs. 402/- per Qtl.) in connivance with Shri Mohd. Ubaid, AG-II (D) for his personal gain.

ARTICLE NO. III:

He misappropriated about 228 ’A’ class gunnies valuing Rs. 4,560/- in connivance with Shri Mohd. Ubadi, Ex. AG-II (D) for his personal gain.

ARTICLE NO. IV:

He misappropriated 8316 B.T. ’A’ class gunnies by showing false replacement at F.S.D. Gola valuing Rs. 1,66,320/- in connivance with Shri Mohd. Ubadi, Ex. AG-II (D) for his personal gain.

ARTICLE NO. V:

He misappropriated 697 B.T. ’A’ class gunnies by showing false replacement at Railhead Gola valuing Rs. 13,940/- for his personal gain.”

Article of Charges in the cas