SATISH KUMAR SOOD Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner at length at admission stage.

(2.) THE petitioner, who was working as Assistant Director in the Information and Public Relation Officer, Sri Ganganagar of the respondent -State, having been appointed as such, vide the order (Annex. 1) dated 15.04.1980, applied for seeking voluntary retirement from the service under Rule 50 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'Rules of 1996') vide Annex. 2 dated 21.10.2013 to be effective from 01.08.2014. The said VRS application was accepted by the respondent, Joint Secretary, Information & Public Relations Department, Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur vide the order (Annex. 3) dated 30.01.2014 to be effective from 01.08.2014. Before the said effective date 01.08.2014, the acceptance order of VRS application was withdrawn by the said authority vide Annex. 7 dated 24.06.2014 and on the same day vide order (Annex. 8) dated 24.06.2014, the petitioner was placed under suspension in contemplation of enquiry under Rule 16 of the CCA Rules, 1958.

(3.) MR . C.S. Kotwani, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Rule 50 of the Rules of 1996 provides for acceptance of said notice and minimum of three months' notice in writing is to be given by the employee concerned. He submitted that in this respect that the Guidelines have also been issued for acceptance of such notice for VRS by the State Government, which are also quoted herein below and they envisage the withholding of such permission to voluntary retirement of a Government servant, in case where the Government servant is under suspension or in whose case disciplinary proceedings are pending or contemplated for the imposition of a major penalty and the disciplinary authority having regard to the circumstances of the case, is of the view that such disciplinary proceedings might result in the imposition of the penalty of removal or dismissal from service, and in whose case the prosecution is contemplated or may have been launched in a court of law. The aforesaid Rule 50 of the Rules of 1996 and the guidelines to its relevant extract is quoted herein below for ready reference: -