KAMAL KANT KHANDELWAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case of the petitioner is that he moved an application for voluntarily retirement on 1/1/2018 setting out his personal and family reasons therefor. Pursuant thereto vide letter dtd. 12/2/2018, the Director, Health and Medical Services, Jaipur informed the Joint Secretary, Health and Medical (Group-2) Department that there was no departmental enquiry or any lis pending against the petitioner. However vide order dtd. 13/3/2018 the petitioner's application for voluntary retirement under Rule 50 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 (hereafter 'the Rules of 1996') has been arbitrarily rejected on the misdirection extraneous to Rule 50 of the Rules of 1996 holding that it was necessary to retain the petitioner as a Doctor in service of the Government for general public and administrative reason.

(2.) Mr. Abhi Goyal counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issue agitated in this petition is fully covered by the judgment passed by the Principal Seat of this Court at Jodhpur in the case of Dr. Kalpana Singh v. State of Rajasthan and Others SBCWP No. 4526/2014 decided on 16/12/2014. He submitted that in the aforesaid judgment of Dr. Kalpana Singh (supra), the petitioner therein has been granted relief as prayed for by her as none of the conditions relevant to refusal of voluntary retirement obtained. Thereafter in the case of Dr. Hari Mohan Gupta v. State of Rajasthan and Others SBCWP No. 13005/2016, was decided on 3/4/2017 in terms of the judgment passed in the case of Dr. Kalpana Singh (supra). Both Dr. Kalpana Singh and Dr. Hari Mohan Gupta- have since been accordingly allowed to voluntary retire in compliance with the aforesaid judgments.

(3.) Mr. Prakhar Gupta appearing for Dr. V.B. Sharma, AAG sought time to file reply.