The impugned proceedings were quashed and companysequential directions also came to be issued by an order dated 2.11.95.
Aggrieved, the respondent filed Writ Petition No.16105 of 1986 before the Karnataka High Court seeking to quash the order of pre mature retirement with effect from 31.8.86 and for companysequential direction to companytinue the respondent in service with all companysequential and attendant benefits.
The request made for withdrawal of the application for pre mature retirement was also number accepted on the ground that the Headquarters does number accede to requests for such cancellation after initial approval of the same by RRM and having regard to the certificate given by the respondent himself.
An appeal filed before the Division Bench of the High Court in W.A. No.1146 of 1996 also did number meet with success, necessitating the appellants to companye before this Court, on further appeal.
While matters stood thus, the respondent was served on 7.3.86 with a companymunication dated 6.3.86 that information has been received from AIR Headquarter in their letter dated 20.2.86 that the respondent will pre maturely retire from service at his own request with effect from 31.8.86, with certain other companysequential directions.
The request further made on 8.7.86 to change at least the date of retirement, did number meet with success and the same was also turned down under a companymunication dated 10.7.86 mailed on 28.7.86 and served on the respondent on 5.8.86.
The learned Single Judge overruled the objection of the Department both on the ground that in the case on hand it has number been averred or substantiated that the petitioner offered for pre mature retirement as a camouflage to get over any difficult assignment of duties and the subsequent change of mind was to gain any undue advantage as well as for the reason that when the offer of the respondent stood withdrawn on 19.2.86, the subsequent action taken by the companypetent Authority on 20.2.86 and onwards will be of numbereffect, having been taken on a letter or offer which by then had numberexistence in the eye of law.
When the matter was under process before the companycerned Authorities, on 6.11.85 the respondent seem to have moved an amendment to his earlier application stating that the actual date of his release companyld be decided taking into account the pensionary recommendations requirements of the IVth Pay Commissions Report which was expected to companye in November 1985.
LITTTTTTJ Raju, J. The respondent was companymissioned in the Indian Air Force on 21.1.1963 as an officer in the Accounts Branch and in due companyrse he successively rose to the rank of Wing Commander by virtue of promotions earned by him, on 17.1.1989.
