1. Heard Sri R.C. Tewari, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondent and Sri Vinod Kumar Singh, learned counsel for opposite party Nos.2 and 3.

2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed that the opposite parties be directed to pay the petitioner earned leave encashment, security deposits along with interest on the delayed payment of the aforesaid dues and also interest on the delayed payment of the gratuity.

3. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner retired from service on 31.07.2016 and till date of his retirement no departmental proceedings or criminal proceedings of any kind whatsoever were pending against the petitioner. As a matter of fact, the petitioner was retired from service without having any stigma on the service record of the petitioner. After retirement of the petitioner, he was paid the amount of gratuity but not well in time and beyond the statutory period and no interest has been paid to the petitioner on the delayed payment of gratuity which has been prescribed in the Act itself. Further submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has not been paid his retiral benefits e.g. earned leave encashment and gratuity deposits for no cogent reasons, therefore, the said amount be also paid to the petitioner with interest.

4. Learned counsel for the opposite party Nos.2 and 3 has filed counter affidavit and as per the counter affidavit, the stand taken by the opposite parties is that the petitioner has allegedly committee irregularity in the year 2012-13 when he was serving at Sonbhadra and the said financial irregularity is consisting a huge amount of Rs.98,27,154.42.

5. Learned counsel for the opposite party Nos.2 and 3 has also submitted that since the amendment has been made in Uttar Pradesh Co-operative Societies Employees Service (Twenty Second Amendment) Regulations, 2018, whereby the departmental enquiry may be initiated against the retired employee of the Co-operative Society like the employees of the State Government. The said amended rules have been enclosed with the counter affidavit as Annexure No.CA-2. The date of notification of the aforesaid amendment is August 27, 2018.

6. I have perused the said amendment and the relevant portion thereof is being reproduced here-in-below :-

"XI. Rules regarding disciplinary proceedings after retirement applicable for the employees of the State Government, shall also be applicable for the employees of the Co-operative Society with due modification from time to time.

Explanation - For for purpose of this sub rules, the word "Governor" has been used under the rules of the State Government, the word "Registrar" shall be deemed to be substituted.

(XII) If an employee retires from the serve while disciplinary proceeding against him is already in operation, the disciplinary proceedings will continue after his retirement."

7. The perusal of the aforesaid amendment reveals that clause-XI provides that the employees retired from the Co-operative Society may also be subjected to the departmental proceedings and clause-XII categorically provides about the category of employee against whom the departmental proceedings can be initiated. Clause-XII clearly mandates that if an employee retires from service while disciplinary proceedings against whom is already in operation, meaning thereby the departmental enquiry may be initiated against those employees against whom the departmental enquiry was pending before his/ her retirement.

8. In the present case, the petitioner retired from service on 31.07.2016 having unblemished service record and the amendment has been notified on 27.08.2018, therefore, the present petitioner may not be subjected for the departmental proceedings invoking the amended provision.

9. Learned counsel for the opposite parties has submitted that since clause-XI provides that the enquiry against the ret