AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
4 paragraphs · 198 wordsR.K. Gupta, J.
The question in the present case is that after when the petitioner has already been compulsorily retired in the year 2002 then if departmental enquiry is not completed within two years as per the Rule 9 of the M.P. Civil services (Pension) Rule, 1976 then whether the employer would continue to enjoy his powers to punish the incumbent in the said departmental enquiry after the period of two years.
The question as such has already been considered by a Division Bench of the Principal seat of this court in State of M.P. and Others Vs. R.L. Ogale and Others, wherein the matter with regard to power of the State Government to continue the departmental enquiry after retirement of an incumbent has received consideration.
In view of the aforesaid, since the matter has already been decided by a Division Bench of the Principal seat of this court, therefore, I am inclined to allow the present petition by giving a direction to the respondents to pay full pension to the petitioner along with arrears there of within a period of three months form the date the petitioner furnishes the certified copy of the order to the respondents.