1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR ORDER Rajendri Devi Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4366/2006 Date of Order : : 10/09/2008 PRESENT HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.R.PANWAR Mr.Girish Joshi & Mr.M.K.Duddy, for the petitioner. Mr.B.L.Tiwari, Addl.Govt. Counsel for the respondents. BY THE COURT: By the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks a direction to quash the orders dated 4.2.2006 and 19.3.2002, Annexure-8 and 4 respectively, and to mandate the respondents to pay entire service benefits to the petitioner as if order dated 19.3.2002 has never been passed. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. The facts and circumstances giving rise to the instant writ petition are that the husband of the petitioner late 2 Gulveer Singh was an employee under the respondent No.3, Superintendent of Police, Bharatpur on the post of Constable, FC No.114. In a departmental inquiry under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 (for short “the CCA Rules” hereinafter), the charges were framed against the delinquent Gulveer Singh since deceased and by order Annexure-4 dated 19.3.2002, the charges were found to have been proved against the delinquent Gulveer Singh and a punishment was imposed to the extent fixing his pension at the minimum pension payable. The delinquent did not file an appeal against the order Annexure-4 dated 19.3.2002 during his life time. However, it has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that delinquent expired on 19.9.2003 almost after one and half year from the date of passing of the order Annexure-4 dated 19.3.2002 by the disciplinary Authority. It also appears that a criminal case was also registered for the very occurrence against the delinquent Gulveer Singh and four others, namely, Raju, Lala Ram, Jaswant Singh and Gilli alias Tillan for the offence under Sections 393, 399 and 402 IPC. After investigation, the police filed challan against all the five persons, named above, before the Special Judge, Dacoity Affected Area, Bharatpur in Sessions Case No.20/1998. However, during the pendency of the trial, Gulveer Singh, the 3 accused therein, expired on 19.9.2003 and therefore, the trial against him stand abated on his death. The other accused persons named above were tried and ultimately by judgment and order dated 17.12.2004, the Special Judge, Dacoity Affected Area, Bharatpur acquitted them by giving the benefit of doubt. After the decision of Special Judge, Dacoity Affected Area, Bharatpur, the petitioner filed a review petition before His Excellency, the Governor of Rajasthan, which was almost after three years from the date of the order Annexure-4 dated 19.3.2002 passed by Disciplinary Authority, which has not been considered. In my view, the order of Disciplinary Authority dated 19.3.2002 is appealable and the deceased during his life time did not file an appeal against the said order and therefore, question of review would not arise. When the remedy of appeal was available and the delinquent did not avail the remedy, it would show that delinquent was not aggrieved by the order Annexure-4 dated 19.3.2002 passed by the Disciplinary Authority. Moreso, it is not the case of the petitioner that the delinquent expired soon after passing of the order Annexure-4. The delinquent was alived at least one and half year after the order Annexure-4 but he did not choose to challenge the order. 4 In this view of the matter, I do not find any merit in the instant writ petition and is, therefore, dismissed. Stay petition also stands dismissed. (H.R.PANWAR), J. NK