RAMESHWAR LAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by the appellant against the judgment dated 01.07.2009 passed by the Single Bench of this Court in CWP No.12391 of 2003, vide which only partial relief was granted to him to the effect that his pension was ordered to be computed in terms of the proviso to rule 18(1)(b)(i) of the All India Services (Death-cum-Retirement) Rules, 1958 as interpreted above within three months from the receipt of copy of that order. The interest @ 8% per annum on the arrears was also allowed.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the appellant, who had obtained Advocates' licence on 06.11.1968, on his selection, joined as Addl. District and Sessions Judge at Hisar in Haryana on 02.05.1983 from the quota of the Bar. In the year 1984-85 when he was posted at Narnaul, on account of certain complaints made against him, the Full Court vide Resolution dated 21.02.1985 terminated his services. A writ petition filed by him challenging his termination was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 09.12.1986. However, Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India in the appeal reinstated him in service. Thereafter, he was posted as Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Narnaul on 09.06.1988. On 06.01.1992, a complaint dated 26.12.1991 was received against the appellant. On which, a preliminary inquiry was conducted and report was submitted on 20.02.1992. Thereafter, another set of complaints was submitted by Shri K.C. Sharma, Advocate, Jind, regarding which preliminary inquiry was ordered to be conducted. In this regard, report was submitted on 10.04.1992. The Full Court on 24.04.1992 decided to charge-sheet the appellant and withdraw the judicial work from him. Since, the appellant had come in the zone of consideration for designation as District and Sessions Judge on 27.07.1992 but the same was not approved as his judicial work had already been withdrawn from him. On account of the Resolution passed by the Full Court, a charge sheet was issued to him on 29.07.1992. On 28.09.1992, he was considered for selection grade but was not granted on account of pendency of the aforesaid charge-sheet. After considering the reply filed by the appellant, the Full Court decided to hold regular departmental inquiry and placed him under suspension in the meeting held on 29.09.1992. Consequently, vide order dated 03.10.1992 the appellant was placed under suspension. In the meanwhile, the appellant attained the age of 55 years. Therefore, the Full Court vide Resolution dated 12.12.1995 recommended to the Government of Haryana to retire the appellant forthwith in public interest by giving three months pay and allowances in lieu of notices. It was ordered that the inquiry will continue for the limited purpose of imposing cut in his retiral benefits. However, vide another Resolution dated 17.01.1996, the Full Court decided that departmental proceedings be not proceeded for the present and departmental inquiries against him are deemed to have been dropped. Consequently, vide order dated 10.05.1996, the appellant was compulsory retired w.e.f. 17.05.1996. The appellant challenged his premature retirement by way of filing CWP No.2091 of 1996. The said petition was allowed by this Court vide judgment dated 22.05.1998 and the order of his compulsory retirement was set aside. The said order was affirmed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court vide order dated 26.04.1999. The appellant was not immediately reinstated and rather the Full Court in the meeting held on 28.05.1999 decided to constitute a committee of three Judges to look into the matter regarding implementation of the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court. The committee submitted its report on 01.06.1999, which was considered by the Full Court on 02.06.1999 and it was decided that the appellant be allowed to join duty. It was also decided that the inquiry which was dropped by Resolution dated 11.01.1996 be revived and the appellant be placed under suspension. Consequently, the appellant was allowed to join duties and thereafter, placed under suspension and the inquiry was revived. The appellant again challenged the said action of this Court by way of filing CWP No.15669 of 1999, which was decided by the Division Bench of this Court, vide order dated 02.06.2000. The said petition was partly allowed and the suspension order (Annexure P-1) was quashed. However, his prayer for quashing the charge-sheet and the decision taken by this Court to revive the inquiry was rejected with liberty to him to raise his objections to the charge-sheet before the inquiry officer. The issue regarding re-designation of the appellant as District and Sessions Judge, release of selection grade and payment of other dues was ordered to be decided after the conclusion of the departmental inquiry. The appellant again approached Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India by way of filing SLP. Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India ordered that inquiry was to continue but its finalization was stayed. Since, the order of quashing of suspension was not implemented, therefore, the appellant filed COCP before this Court. While all these proceedings were continued, the appellant filed representation dated 05.01.2002, which is reproduced as under:

(3.) The appellant also withdrew his COPC. The Full Court vide its Resolution dated 26.07.2002 passed the following order: