3 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No. 1476/2002 [MANA RAM VS. STATE & ORS.] Dated : 26.02.2008 HON'BLE MR. MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI, J. Mr.K.R.Choudhary for the petitioner. Mr.Alkesh Agarwal for the respondent. ***** By this writ petition a challenge has been made to the order dated 05.07.2000 by which the petitioner was given compulsory retirement pursuant to the Rajasthan Civil Service (Pension ) Rules of 1996 . Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that other than pendency of inquiry pursuant to the charge sheet issued in the Year 1995, there exist neither adverse entry nor any punishment against the petitioner so as to form an opinion that petitioner has became a dead wood thus to be given compulsory retirement. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that charges against the petitioner are quite serious and in that regard even charge sheet was also given though inquiry could not completed so as to pass final order but then taking note of the charges as well as unsatisfactory service of the petitioner, the order impugned has been passed. Considering the arguments of both the parties and after perusing the material on record I find that there exist no averment in reply regarding existence of adverse entry or punishment against petitioner yet an order of compulsory retirement has been passed and now to justify the said order what has been stated is only that petitioner's service was not found satisfactory. If the charges levelled against the petitioner in charge sheet was taken into consideration, the order impugned became punitive. Thus it cannot stand in absence of completion of inquiry. Perusal of the facts available on record shows that other than the pendency of the inquiry, there is nothing on record to justify the order of compulsory retirement and to further show as to how service of petitioner was not found satisfactory. In absence of any material, no opinion can be framed to treat employee as dead wood. In view of the above discussion, I do not find any justification in passing impugned order of the compulsory retirement. Hence the same is set aside. The writ petition is accordingly, allowed. However acceptance of the writ petition will not come in the way of respondents to complete the inquiry pursuant to the charge sheet earlier served and pass an appropriate order in accordance to the Rules. As a consequence of setting aside the impugned order the petitioner may be taken on duty and he may be extended notional benefit and continuity of service for the intervening period. (MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI), J. mamta