C.W.P.No.6628 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.6628 of 2011 Date of Decision:- 19.04.2011 G.D.Hans ....Petitioner(s) vs. The Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana and another ....Respondent(s) *** CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH *** Present:- Mr.G.D.Hans, petitioner in person. *** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (Oral) The present writ petition has been filed by a former Judicial Officer who was appointed in the year 1962. He was dismissed from service. The said order of dismissal was challenged by him through CWP No.1094 of 1977 which was dismissed in limine on 28.7.1977 by this Court. The petitioner approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court and his case being Civil Appeal No.2236 of 1978 was decided on 19.1.1982 observing therein that the writ petition preferred by the petitioner, was a fit case and should have been admitted by the High Court instead of dismissing the same in limine. The order dated 28.7.1977 passed by this Court was set aside and the matter was remanded to the High Court for disposal of the writ petition on merits. A desire was expressed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court for early possible disposal of the writ petition by the High Court. A submission was made by the counsel for the petitioner before the Hon'ble Supreme Court C.W.P.No.6628 of 2011 -2- that the petitioner may be permitted to proceed on voluntary retirement instead of order of dismissal passed against him without prejudice to the merits of his case. This request was left open to be considered by the High Court. The writ petition preferred by the petitioner which was remanded to this Court for fresh decision was as per the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the petitioner, who has appeared in person, informs the Court that the same was finally decided by this Court on merits, the result whereof was in dismissal. The petitioner challenged the said order before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the SLP preferred by him was also dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The petitioner as per the order dated 19.7.2008 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.2236 of 1978 submitted applications to the High Court dated 23.11.1982, 15.12.1982 and 19.1.1983 requesting for voluntary retirement from service instead of order of dismissal passed against him. These applications preferred by the petitioner were considered in the meeting of the Judges of this Court but his request for voluntary retirement from service was declined and he was accordingly informed through letter dated 12.4.1983 (Annexure P-2). The petitioner did not take any further steps except that he moved an application in the year 2002 for supply of the copy of the order passed by this Court on his application seeking voluntary retirement but he was not supplied with the same. He thereafter again filed a representation dated 9.11.2010 (Annexure A-4) to the High Court for reconsideration of his request for voluntary retirement. The said representation was considered and ordered to be placed on record and this fact was conveyed to him vide letter dated C.W.P.No.6628 of 2011 -3- 22.2.2011 (Annexure A-5). The present writ petition has been filed praying for quashing of the communication dated 12.4.1983 (Annexure P-2) whereby the petitioner was informed that his request for voluntary retirement from amus directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to proceed on voluntary retirement and release all benefits of retirement as per the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 19.1.1982 (Annexure P-1). Petitioner who has appeared in person submits that his application for voluntary retirement from service should have been allowed by the High Court in the light of the binding direction issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 19.1.1982 in Civil Appeal No.2236 of 1978 preferred by him. He insists that there was a direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court for permitting him to proceed on voluntary retirement instead of order of dismissal passed against him. He, on this basis, has contended that the impugned communication dated 12.4.1983 (Annexure P-2) declining his request for voluntary retirement from service deserves to be set aside and he should be granted/released all consequential benefits. His further contention is that despite his efforts, he has not been supplied the copy of the order declining his request for voluntary retirement from service and he has been deprived of his right to challenge the same by non-supply of the said order. I have heard the petitioner and am afraid that the contentions as put-forth by him cannot be accepted. The basis of the submissions made by the petitioner is the order dated 19.1.1982 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.2236 of 1978, therefore, reproduction of the same would be beneficial at this stage C.W.P.No.6628 of 2011 -4- which reads as follows:- “Order This appeal by special leave is filed against the order dated July 28, 1977 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh dismissing the writ petition CWP No.1094 of 1977 filed by the appellant at the stage of admission. On going through the papers we are of the view that this was a fit case which should have been admitted by the High Court and disposed of by a Judgment on merits. We, therefore, set aside the order passed by the High Court and remand the case to the High Court to dispose of the writ petition on merits. We request the High Court to consider the submission which was made before us by Shri P.P.Rao that without prejudice to the merits of his case that he might be permitted to proceed on voluntary retirement instead of the order of dismissal passed against him. We leave this request to be considered by the High Court. Since disciplinary proceedings were initiated in the year 1973, we felt that it is desirable that this case should be disposed of by the High Court as early as possible and preferably before the end of April, 1982. We hope that the High Court will be able to dispose of the case as suggested above. Sd/-, J. E.S.Venkataramiah Sd/-, J. Baharul Islam” C.W.P.No.6628 of 2011 -5- A perusal of the above order would show that a submission was raised by the counsel for the petitioner that without prejudice to the case of the petitioner, he may be permitted to proceed on voluntary retirement instead of order of dismissal passed against him. The Hon'ble Supreme Court did not accept the same nor did it pass any directions in this regard but left this request to be considered by the High Court. Thus, the contention of the petitioner that there was a mandate to the High Court to permit the petitioner to proceed on voluntary retirement is totally misplaced. Further, the applications dated 23.11.1982, 15.12.1982 and 19.1.1983 preferred by the petitioner as per submissions of his counsel in the Hon'ble Supreme Court, were duly considered in the meeting of the Judges of the High Court but his request for voluntary retirement from service was declined. This decision was communicated to him vide memorandum dated 12.4.1983 (Annexure P-2). It appears, thereafter the petitioner kept silent and only woke up in the year 2002 when he filed an application in the High Court for supply of copies of the applications dated 23.11.1982, 15.12.1982 and 19.1.1983 for voluntary retirement and also order of the Judges of this Court declining his request for voluntary retirement. This request of the petitioner could not be acceded to as the personal file of the petitioner went missing at the time of theft of administrative files in the year 1997. This fact was duly communicated to the petitioner in the year 2002 itself. The petitioner thereafter also remained silent and then filed representation dated 9.11.2010 for reconsideration of his request for voluntary retirement from service which was earlier declined vide communication dated 12.4.1983. The said C.W.P.No.6628 of 2011 -6- request was also considered and filed and the decision was conveyed to him vide letter dated 22.2.2011. This shows the most casual and lethargic approach on the part of the petitioner to pursue his claim, if any. Had the petitioner felt aggrieved by the order declining his request for voluntary retirement which was communicated to him on 12.4.1983, immediate steps for procuring such order would have been taken by him but instead, the first earnest effort in this regard was made by the petitioner vide application dated 3.10.2002 when he requested for supply of the copy of the order declining his request for voluntary retirement and thereafter it is only in the year 2010 that he again represented for reconsideration of his case for voluntary retirement. This itself is a good ground for not entertaining the present writ petition on account of delay and laches. But that apart, order of dismissal passed by this Court was challenged by the petitioner in CWP No.1094 of 1977, which after admission as per the order dated 19.1.1982 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, was duly heard on merits and dismissed by this Court in the year 1983, which fact has been admitted by the petitioner but he is unable to disclose that date. He has further admitted that the Special Leave Petition preferred by him before the Supreme Court also stood dismissed, meaning thereby the order of dismissal from service of the petitioner has since attained finality. In these circumstances, the prayer as has been made by the petitioner in the present writ petition cannot be accepted but only deserves to be rejected. Accordingly, the present writ petition being without any merit is dismissed. April 19, 2011 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) poonam JUDGE