BHANWAR SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant petition has been filed by the petitioner claiming relief therein that the respondents may be directed to extend benefit of the encashment of privilege leave to him alongwith interest @ 12% of the delayed payment of unutilised privilege leave from the date of his retirement.

(2.) GLARING facts giving rise to the instant petition are that the petitioner was appointed vide order dated 7. 7. 1967 on the post of constable. Thereafter, vide order dated 13. 3. 1975, he was promoted to the post of Head Constable by the respondent department. Then, vide order dated 1. 10. 1983, he was promoted to the post of Asstt. Sub Inspector and later on the he was also promoted to the post of Sub Inspector.

(3.) RELYING upon the aforesaid Rule, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that it is clear that if compulsory retirement is made as a measure of penalty under the Rajasthan Civil Services (CCA) Rules, 1958, then benefit under the sub-rule is not admissible to the petitioner.