(1.) THE petitioner in this writ petition is aggrieved by the Government resolution dated 15.5.1997 contained in Annexure 4, whereby and whereunder certain punishments have been imposed upon him and an order for recovery from his pensionary benefits has also been passed.
(2.) THE petitioner superannuated from the service on 30th April, 1997 while posted as Executive Engineer, Road Construction Department, Patna and only after his retirement the aforementioned order of punishment was passed.
(3.) IT is not disputed that there was no departmental proceeding initiated against the petitioner either while he was in service or even after his retirement in terms of proviso to rule 43(b) of the Bihar Pension rules. Under such circumstances, this Court fails to appreciate as to how the impugned order can be sustained. Once the petitioner was allowed to superannuate on 30th April, 1997, the relationship of master and servant terminated and thereafter no order of such punishment could be legally passed by the authority except after proceeding in terms of proviso to rule 43(b) or under rule 139 of the Bihar Pension Rules. This aspect has been considered in detail in the case of Sachchidanand Singh V/s. The State of Bihar and others (C.W.J.C. No. 7550 of 1998, disposed of on 14.9.1999) in which this Court has held that such action is not permissible in law.