ALOK SHUKLA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking following reliefs:-

(2.) Precisely stated facts of the case are that petitioner at the relevant time was working as Assistant Engineer in the Public Works and Health Department and was posted at Maintenance SubDivision, Motijheel, Gwalior. Due to personal difficulties, petitioner applied for voluntary retirement in the year 2009 as per the provision of Rule 42 (1) (a) of M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 (hereinafter referred as "Rules, 1976") and as submitted petitioner was having the required qualifying service for invoking the provision of the aforesaid rules as he was initially appointed in the department on 5/1/1981. Petitioner's application was accepted vide order dtd. 28/8/2009 and accordingly, the petitioner stood retired from the government service w.e.f. 31/8/2009.

(3.) Although petitioner was shown to be a suspended employee, however, petitioner was never placed under suspension and aforesaid mistake was rectified by issuing corrigendum to the order of (Annexure P-1) vide order dtd. 29/8/2009 and it has to be read as Assistant Engineer (Civil) and not as Assistant Engineer (Suspended). However, to appreciate the controversy in better perspective following list of dates and events are important: