DHANIRAM NETAM Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent authorities to release the pension and other retrial benefits along with interest or the respondents be directed to re-enlist (reinstate) the petitioner in service, as provided under the Regulation No.260 of the Madhya Pradesh Police Regulations.

(2.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner who was working as Constable (56) submitted an application for his voluntary retirement on account of some personal reasons, which was accepted vide order dated 13-12-1991 (Annexure - P/1). Thereafter, no action has been taken by the respondent authorities to settle the pension and other retrial dues of the petitioner in spite of the fact that the petitioner has run from pillar to post by making several requests including the representations. Even on 23-9-1996 (Annexure - P/5) the respondent No.5 wrote a letter to the Assistant Inspector General of Police (Personnel), Police Headquarters, Bhopal, and requested to consider the case of the petitioner for settlement of his legal dues, who, in turn, referred the same to the respondent No.3, but till date the case of the petitioner has not been considered. The conduct of the respondents is unreasonable, discriminatory and not at all sustainable in the eyes of law.

(3.) THE contention of the learned counsel for the State that on the date of appointment on 6-9-1971 the petitioner was below the age of 18 years, thus taking into consideration his eligibility of being 18 years he was not completed 20 years of service. However, from the date of appointment till the date of voluntary retirement, the petitioner had completed the service of 20 years 3 months 26 days.