G C BHATT Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HAVING completed 20 years' service, petitioner sought voluntary retirement. He claims not to have received any reply and on the plea that if within 3 months of his submitting application for being voluntarily retired the same was not rejected, he would be deemed to have retired. Instant petition came to be filed alleging that after he was formally released post acceptance of his application for being voluntarily retired, to the shock of his life, petitioner received a memo under Rule 9 of the CCS Pension Rules alleging misconduct of accepting illegal gratification in sum of `1,30,000/- to secure recruitment to a civilian and taking `70,000/- from his security aide and not returning the same.

(2.) PLEADING grounds in the writ petition which relate to petitioner's entitlement to be voluntarily retired, which we note are nothing but an intention to mislead the Court, petitioner claims that inquiry cannot be held against him.

(3.) SUFFICE would it be to state that the impugned memorandum issued to the petitioner to hold an inquiry on the listed charge is with the Presidential sanction.