IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.295 of 2011 DIRECTOR-CUM-SECRETARY,RURAL INSTITUTE,BIRAULI, Samastipur, P.s. Pusa, District Samastipur …. Respondent - Appellant Versus 1. DR.DHIRENDRA KUMAR DAS “ARVIND”, Son of Kameshwar Lal Das, at present residing at Birauli, P.S. Pusa, District Samastipur … Petitioner – Respondent 2. The State of Bihar 3. The Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 4. The Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 5. The Director (Administration) cum Additional Secretary, Human Resources Development, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 6. Director, Higher Education, Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. … Respondents .. Respondents ----------- For the Appellant : Mr. Abhinav Srivastava, Advocate For the State : M/s Manoj Kr. Ambastha, G.P. 14 Subodh Kumar, A.C. to G.P. 14 For the Respondent no.1 : M/s Jitendrna Kr. Singh, Sr. Advocate Kripa Nand Jha & Tej Pratap Singh, Advocates ------ 3 19.05.2011 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the private respondent. The learned writ court has taken note of earlier dispute between the private respondent and the authorities of the Institute, the appellant, his suspension, departmental proceeding on certain charges 2 and has concluded that on removing the veil of innocuous order of compulsory retirement, it appears to be a case of penal removal of the appellant. In that view of the matter, after placing reliance upon a judgment of the Apex Court that in appropriate cases veil can be removed from an order of compulsory retirement, the writ court has quashed the order of compulsory retirement dated 5.8.2010. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that it was not proper to infer from the facts and circumstances that the order of compulsory retirement was actually penal in nature with a view to circumvent the formalities in a pending departmental proceeding. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any illegality or error in the order of the writ court so as to warrant interference, therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It goes without saying that as an employer the concerned authority will always have liberty to initiate or continue a departmental proceeding in accordance with law. The effect of quashing of the 3 order of compulsory retirement would be to revive the relationship of the employer and the employee and hence the private respondent must be allowed to join his post forthwith if he has not been allowed to join so far. Spd/- (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)