ORAL ORDER

1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed with following prayer(s):-

“7 (A) Your Lordship be pleased to admit and allow this petition.

(B) Your Lordship be pleased to direct the respondent authority to consider the application of the petitioner and give continuous service benefit and retirement benefits and pension benefit and all other benefits to the petitioner in the interest of justice.

(C) Your Lordship be pleased to pending admission and final hearing and disposal of this petition be pleased to direct the respondent authority to give provisional pension and other benefits in the interest of justice.

(D) ...”

2. Essentially, the petitioner, who was proceeded against departmentally on account of his involvement in the criminal offence, has prayed for considering the petitioner to be in continuing service with retirement benefits.

3. Mr.Siddharth Dave, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was inflicted with the punishment of compulsory retirement only on the basis of a criminal case against the petitioner, where the petitioner was convicted after the trial.

3.1 It is submitted that, however, the petitioner had preferred an appeal before the higher forum and the Appellate Court had set-aside the conviction and acquitted the petitioner.

3.2 It is submitted that, as the order of compulsory retirement was based only on the fact of the petitioner being convicted, the situation had changed and the petitioner in the appeal before the Appellate Court was acquitted, and therefore, the order of compulsory retirement ought not to be continued and the petitioner should be treated as continuing in service .

3.3 Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that for the purpose of inflicting of compulsory retirement, the respondent authorities ought to have undertaken some departmental proceedings and pursuant to such proceedings, the order could have been inflicted, which in present case, the authorities have failed to do so, and therefore, there is gross violation of principle of natural justice.

4. As against this, learned AGP has submitted that the petitioner has incorrectly stated that no proceedings have taken place, whereas, in fact, the petitioner has been issued with the Show Cause Notice and ample opportunity of hearing and only thereafter, the order of punishment has been passed on 21.11.2011. The petitioner has not challenged such an order and merely on the basis of acquittal recorded by the appellate forum, the present petition is moved.

4.1 It is submitted that against the order of acquittal, the State has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 69 of 2017 where the Leave to Appeal is granted to the State and the appeal is, now, pending before this Court.

4.2 Learned AGP drew attention of this Court to the order dated 21.11.2011, wherein it has been recorded the nature of show cause notice issue and opportunity to the petitioner to show cause before passing the order of compulsory retirement.

5. At this stage, learned advocate for the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner had proposed Draft Amendment on 18.01.2017 to bring on record the order passed by the Tribunal where the petitioner had challenged the order dated 21.11.2011, however, the Tribunal had rejected the appeal. By way of amendment, the petitioner also desire to challenge the order in appeal.

6. Having heard learned advocates for the parties and having perused the documents on record, the petitioner was involved in a criminal offence under sections 408, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 read with 114 of the Indian Penal Code, where offence was registered with Kadi Police Station being being I.C.R.No.62 of 2008. The gist of the offence was that the lands at village – Vamaj, Tal. - Kadi of - Block no. 1951 ad-measuring of 0 Hec.- 47 Are – 57 sqr. mtrs., of assessment 3-30 of new tenure and indivisible type of authority was granted to Moti Punja Senma - and - of Block no. 1952 ad-measuring of 1 Hec-