INDRA PRAKASH BHATNAGAR Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a miscellaneous petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India for a writ of mandamus or any other suitable writ, order of direction to the respondents to treat the petitioner as having validly retired voluntarily from the post of Assistant Director of Industries, borne on the establishment of Office of the Genera! Manager, the District industries Centre, Gwalior (hereinafter referred to as 'g. M. D. I. C. G. ')with effect from 18th October, 1983 under Rule 42 (i) (a) (hereinafter also referred to as clause (a) of the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (Pension)Rules, 1976 (hereinafter also referred to as the Pension Rules,) in terms of his application dated 5-7-1983 (copy Annexure P/3) addressed by him to the Secretary, the Department of Commerce and Industries M. P. Bhopal (hereinafter also referred to respectively as the Secretary and the department ).

(2.) DURING arguments in this Court the learned Deputy Government advocate produced in Court for perusal an office file of the District Indus-tries Centre, Gwalior, 1983, major head 'dic Gwalior', minor head 'esta-blishment Branch F. No. DIC Gwalior/establishment /83 dealing with the subject of voluntary retirement of petitioner Indra Bahadur Bhataagar. The counsel of the parties have agreed that this Court may look into the correspondence in this file. I have, therefore, looked into the correspon-dence in the file in order to have a full picture of the facts material to a just decision on the petition.

(3.) FROM the recitals at paragraph 3 of the writ petition and the respondents' return dated 1-5-1984, it appears that earlier the petitioner had filed a writ petition in the High Court of Madhya Pradesh for getting the relief of consideration of his claim for promotion to a higher post. The High Court allowed the writ petition on 11-8-1981. It appears that then the petitioner had also filed a petition initiating a Contempt of Court proceeding against the non-petitioners in the earlier case (The present respondents have urged that the petitioner was considered and was found unfit for promotion ).