CWP 1903/07 //1// In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench ** Civil Writ Petition No.1903/2007 Bhawani S. Rajawat Versus State & (2) Ors. Date of Order ::: 07/05/08 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. SD Khaspuria, for petitioner Mr. JK Agrawal, DyGA for respondents State Instant petition has been filed with the grievance that despite petitioner having retired from service on 30/04/2000 while working as Executive Engineer in the Irrigation Department, his retiral dues particularly gratuity & computation of pension have not been released because of pendency of disciplinary inquiry. For alleged delinquency, charge sheet was served on 13/04/2000 and after holding inquiry, the inquiry officer found the charges not proved and submitted report dt.07/01/03 to disciplinary authority. It appears that disciplinary authority has not agreed to the finding recorded by inquiry office and after almost four years, disagreement note dt.11/04/07 of disciplinary authority was served upon him on 15/04/07, to which reply (Ann.8) was immediately filed on 12/06/07. But the fact remains that almost 11 months have now rolled by, still no final orders have been passed which is basically causing prejudice to the petitioner. CWP 1903/07 //2// Respondents in their reply para 11 inter- alia averred that since disciplinary authority has not disagreed to the finding recorded by Inquiry Officer and because of pendency of inquiry, retiral dues could not have been released. It is true that pendente inquiry, State Government is empowered to withhold gratuity U/r 91 of Pension Rules, 1996, but the fact remains as to how long inquiry could remain pending, for which there is no outer limit fixed by Rule making authority under the belief that the authority would expeditiously dispose of disciplinary inquiry particularly in cases where employees are likely to retire in near future. In instant case, charge sheet was served on 13/04/2000, for which inquiry was conducted and inquiry officer submitted his report way back on 07/01/03 and almost four years thereafter, disciplinary authority issued disagreement note to the inquiry report, but has not taken final decision so as to conclude disciplinary inquiry despite 11 months have rolled by even after submission of reply to disagreement note on 12/06/07, which has certainly caused prejudice to the petitioner who is a retired personnel having retired way back on 30/04/2000 from which date his retiral dues stand withheld. CWP 1903/07 //3// Though Counsel has made submission on merits but since disciplinary authority has yet to consider record of inquiry for taking final decision in disciplinary action, this Court refrains from expressing opinion on merits. Consequently, writ petition stands partly allowed and respondents are directed to pass final orders on pending disciplinary inquiry within three months from today and communicate its decision to the petitioner and grant of consequential benefits including retiral dues be considered in accordance with pension Rules thereafter. No order as to costs. (Ajay Rastogi), J. K.Khatri/p3/1903CW07-0705.doc