O R D E R

The instant petition has been filed for grant of the following reliefs:-

“i) A writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or directions may be issued to the respondents to release the pension/family pension and other retiral benefits such as leave encashment, gratuity, etc. etc. etc.

ii) To allow interest on the illegally withheld pension and other retiral benefits from the date of expiry of 3 months notice for volunteer reitrement i.e. 31-05-2017 till the date of release.”

2. The petitioner was appointed as a Sanitary Inspector on 28.06.1984 in the erstwhile Municipal Committee, Kullu, now Municipal Council, Kullu. On

28.02.2017, he submitted an application to 3rd respondent for voluntary retirement. The same, according to the petitioner, was considered and accepted by the Municipal Council, Kullu on 22.04.2017 and then sent to the Director, Urban Development, who returned the same vide OfÏce letter dated 09.05.2017 with a direction to the Executive OfÏcer, Municipal Council, Kullu, to provide certain documents.

3. The Executive OfÏcer, Kullu, in turn, vide letter dated 24.07.2017 asked the petitioner to account for/reconcile a sum of Rs.26,08,550/- plus Rs.10,000/- given as an advance from time to time and even in reply thereto, the petitioner submitted the details of vouchers that have already been submitted.

4. However, Since, the monthly pension/family pension and other retiral benefits were not released in favour of the petitioner, therefore, he got served a legal notice upon the respondents followed by a reminder, but of no avail, hence this petition.

5. Respondent No.3 i.e. Municipal Council, Kullu, alone has contested the petition by filing reply wherein it is averred that the replying respondent vide resolution No. 6 dated 12.04.2017 after considering the application for premature retirement of the petitioner forwarded such application for approval vide letter dated 01.05.2017.

6. The Director, Urban Development, vide letter dated 09.05.2017 directed the replying respondent to examine the required documents provided under the H.P. Civil Services (Premature Retirement) Rules, 1976. The replying respondent looked into the matter and found some irregularities/misappropriations in the matters of advance(s) that had been given to the petitioner by the replying respondent from time to time for maintaining sanitary facilities within the area of Council.

7. The advances outstanding in the name of the petitioner were pointed out by the Audit OfÏcer vide memo No.23 dated 10.05.2016 worth Rs.26,18,550/-. This amount was received by the petitioner in advance and was not adjusted even after a period of 9 to 57 months from the date it was granted.

8. The replying respondent thereafter issued a letter dated 24.07.2017 to the petitioner to produce the documents in respect of the advance given to him and asked him to reconcile the aforesaid amount. When the petitioner failed to do so, the replying respondent once again issued a letter dated 11.12.2017 asking the petitioner to clear all the adjustments with respect to the advance given to the petitioner as his pension case was pending because of such irregularities/misappropriations in the outstanding advances.

9. Thereafter, the petitioner produced the vouchers with respect to the expenditure and adjustments of advance taken by the petitioner, but the same were only to the tune of Rs.17,30,650/- out of an amount of Rs.26,18,550/- and failed to produce the vouchers/documents with respect to remaining amount of Rs.8,89,900/-. In these circumstances, the case for premature retirement of the petitioner was not accepted by respondent No.2.

10. The documents forwarded by the replying respondent were returned by the Director, Rural Development, to re-examine the case and to take necessary action in the matter. The application moved by the petitioner has not been accepted and consequently the request made by him for premature retirement has not been allowed.

11. The p