OM PRAKASH SHARMA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Mool Behari Saxena, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel.

(2.) The petitioner has challenged the order of voluntary retirement dated 20.5.2006 as communicated by Superintendent of Police on 23.5.2008 on the ground that the said action is vitiated inasmuch as there is no provision under the Police Regulations for voluntary retirement and secondly the petitioner had already moved an application for not accepting the said voluntary retirement as he had now recovered from his ailment."

(3.) The first ground taken need not detain this Court inasmuch as the provisions of Fundamental Rule 56(c) apply and this aspect was dealt with while considering the case of a voluntary retirement of a police official by this Court in the case of Surendra Naraln Singh v. Deputy Inspector General of Police, Gorakhpur Range, Gorakhpur and Ors.,1995 ACJ 482.