(1.) The respondent was commissioned in the Indian Air Force on 21-1-1963 as an officer in the Accounts Branch and in due course he successively rose to the rank of Wing Commander by virtue of promotions earned by him on 17-1-1989. Having regard to certain problems in the family due to continued illness of his wife and need to face other commitments and responsibilities he was constrained to seek for pre-mature retirement. He submitted an application dated 21-7-1985 praying for premature retirement from service with effect from 31-8-1986 with 6 months leave preparatory to retirement said to be due to him with the admissible full non-effective benefits. It is a fact that as expected of him he also furnished a certificate stating that he was aware that any request made by him later for the cancellation of his application for premature retirement would not be accepted.
(2.) When the matter was under process before the concerned Authorities, on 6-11-85 the respondent seem to have moved an amendment to his earlier application stating that the actual date of his release could be decided taking into account the pensionary recommendations/requirements of the IVth Pay Commission's Report which was expected to come in November, 1985. In view of this the date of retirement sought with effect from 31-8-86 itself, according to the respondent stood altered before any decision was taken or communicated. On 19-2-86, the respondent on being able to, as claimed by him surmount the health problems of his wife and also sort out the other difficulties, submitted an application seeking to withdraw the application earlier submitted for premature retirement from service with a favourable recommendation thereon by the group captain - Command Accounts Officer. While matters stood thus, the respondent was served on 7-3-86 with a communication dated 6-3-86 that information has been received from AIR Headquarter in their letter dated 20-2-86 that the respondent will prematurely retire from service at his own request with effect from 31-8-86, with certain other consequential directions. The request made for withdrawal of the application for premature retirement was also not accepted on the ground that the Headquarters does not accede to requests for such cancellation after initial approval of the same by RRM and having regard to the certificate given by the respondent himself. The request further made on 8-7-86 to change at least the date of retirement, did not meet with success and the same was also turned down under a communication dated 10-7-86 mailed on 28-7-86 and served on the respondent on 5-8-86.
(3.) Aggrieved, the respondent filed Writ Petition No. 16105 of 1986 before the Karnataka High Court seeking to quash the order of premature retirement with effect from 31-8-86 and for consequential direction to continue the respondent in service with all consequential and attendant benefits. The Department's stand before the High Court as is now before us was that under the existing policy there was no scope for withdrawing the application for premature retirement, once submitted, that in the light of such policy the respondent also gave a certificate that he was aware of the fact that his subsequent request for withdrawal will not be accepted and that such a policy came to be adopted in public interest in the light of the experience gained from the move of the officers often to seek premature retirement when there is a difficult duty to be performed and attempting to seek for cancellation after tiding over/avoiding the same and consequently, no exception could be taken to the action of the Department.