NAROTAM DASS MEHTA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CM No 12102 of 2004 C.M is allowed Replication alongwith Annexures P-5 to P-8 is taken on record C.W.P. No. 19597 of 2003 The petitioner retned on superannuation on February 28, 2003 after putting in about 35 years of service with the respondents It is his case that at the time of retirement, no charge- sheet or enquiry of any kind was pending against him Since the retiral benefits were not being paid to the petitioner, he filed the present writ petition on December 15,2003

(2.) It appeal s that on receiving notice of the writ petition the respondents issued a notice of the petition proposing disciplinary action for pecuniary loss of more than Rs 30 lacs allegedly caused by the petitioner and it has now been urged that as this amount was due from him, the retiral benefits had been rightly withheld

(3.) It is, however, the admitted position that the petitioner had filed a detailed reply to the notice issued to him on which the proceedings aforesaid have been dropped vide order dated July 14, 2004