JUDGMENT 1. - The main grievance of the petitioner raised in the writ petition is to issue a direction to the respondents to treat the petitioner continue in service till the age of superannuation and grant him notional benefits and thereby actual pensionary benefits. Apart from above, the petitioner has also sought a direction that subsistence allowance of the suspension period i.e. October, 1975 to October, 1982, salary for the period January, 2001 onwards during which the petitioner has rendered his services under the respondent No. 2 be also paid.Briefly stated the relevant facts of the case as per the petitioner are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Tikakar (Vaccinator) in June, 1964. Till 15.10.1975, the petitioner continued as such and thereafter, he was placed under suspension. The said suspension order was revoked on 22.10.1982 while reserving the right of initiating the departmental proceedings. It is stated in the writ petition that thereafter no enquiry was initiated.In the additional affidavit placed on the record of the petition, the respondent State has not disputed the above mentioned facts. However, the respondents have disputed the other facts by stating that on 1.12.1982, the petitioner was transferred from Karauli to Jaisalmer where he joined on 15.12.1982 and vide order dated 16.12.1982, the petitioner was posted at Primary Health Centre, Sangod in Jaisalmer where he joined his duties on 17.12.1982. From 19.12.1982, he proceeded on casual leave of 6 days and then filed an extension application. The petitioner attained the superannuation age on 29.2.2000. By suppressing this fact, the petitioner has made an application to Deputy CMHO on 18.9.2000 for joining. However, a letter written by Nathu Ram Aahari, MLA dated 22.9.2000 was received by the respondents through the Hon'ble Minister. Thereafter, under some mistake, he was allowed to continue upto 31.3.2003, but the petitioner has not disclosed the fact that he had already been superannuated on 29.2.2000. 2. Submission of counsel for the petitioner is that undisputed period of his services is from June, 1964 to 14.10.1975 and subsequent period from 15.10.1975 till his reinstatement vide order dated 22.10.1982 is also liable to be regularised on account of the fact that no departmental enquiry was initiated till date. 2. Submission of counsel for the petitioner is that undisputed period of his services is from June, 1964 to 14.10.1975 and subsequent period from 15.10.1975 till his reinstatement vide order dated 22.10.1982 is also liable to be regularised on account of the fact that no departmental enquiry was initiated till date. It is submitted by Government Advocate that the period from June, 1964 to 14.10.1975 is undisputed and after 15.10.1975 to 22.10.1982, the petitioner has not marked his attendance at the headquarter, therefore, he is not entitled either for subsistence allowance or for salary of the suspension period and further period from 20.12.1982 is highly disputed and a decision is required to be taken on the said period.Heard counsel for the parties and gone through the record of the writ petition and further considered rival submissions of the parties. 3. Considering the above aspect of the matter, I am of the view that the period from June, 1964 to 15.10.1975 is the period of regular service and from 15.10.1975 to 22.10.1982 the period also deserves to be regularised on account of the fact that no departmental enquiry was initiated till date. In case of departmental enquiry also, if a person is exonerated then as per Rule 54 of Rajasthan Service Rules, the period of suspension is liable to be regularised. The case of the petitioner is on better footing than a person against whom departmental enquiry is initiated, therefore, the said period is to be regularised. As regard the period from 22.10.1982 to 29.2.2000, a decision is required to be taken by the Government. 4. In view of above, the respondents are directed to make the payment of salary from 15.10.1975 to 22.10.1982 and the respondents are further directed to grant the consequential benefit of pension from June, 1964 to 22.10.1982 including salary. The aforesaid exercise be completed within a period of three months. 5. As regards from 22.10.1982 upto 29.2.2000, the respondents are free to conduct the enquiry after notice to the petitioner for taking any decision on the issue of regularisation of the petitioner. The period of over and above of superannuation age i.e. 29.2.2000 shall not be counted towards pension. In case aforesaid period is regularised then pension be revised accordingly. The said exercise be completed within a period of six months. 6. The writ petition is disposed of as indicated above.Writ Petition Allowed As Above. *******