Judgment 1. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. Based on a conviction order dated 4.2.1989 passed by Special Judge, C.B.I., petitioner came to be compulsorily retired on 29.12.2001. In the meanwhile it seems that conviction matter travelled to Supreme Court, the Supreme Court remanded the matter back to Patna High Court for reconsideration and by a reasoned decision contained in Annexure-5 petitioner was acquitted of the charges. Soon after acquittal petitioner moved this High Court in C.W.J.C. No. 1068 of 2002 challenging the order of compulsory retirement on the ground that since then his conviction by a Criminal Court has been set aside. Vide order dated 15.12.2006 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 1068 of 2002 a Bench of this Court directed the authorities to reconsider the matter in light of these developments. Petitioner thereafter has filed his various representations and requests before the competent authority to reinstate him in service. It was in this background that Annexure-13 dated 14.2.2007 came to be passed. Petitioner has been reinstated but two orders have been passed in the order of reinstatement. The authorities in their wisdom state that the petitioner would be reinstated but without back wages. The second part says that his reinstatement will be subject to deposit of the amount of Gratuity, encashment of unutilised earned leave and C.P.F. amount alongwith interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum which the petitioner must deposit within 15 days of the date of receipt of this order. 3. Confronted with this order the petitioner moved the High Court again in the present writ application. This Court is of the opinion that the riders which has been imposed against the petitioner with regard to prior deposit of gratuity, encashment of unutilised earned leave and C.P.F. amount with 12 per cent interest on the face of it may look innocuous but the same has been passed only to frustrate the order of reinstatement. No doubt the petitioner has been paid certain amounts by virtue of the order of compulsory retirement and he has received this amount but then it is always up to the authorities to adjust these amounts from the wages of the petitioner once he joins the organisation. These are matters of accounting and adjustments and the same cannot be utilised to prevent the entry of the petitioner into the organisation or his reinstatement. These are matters of accounting and adjustments and the same cannot be utilised to prevent the entry of the petitioner into the organisation or his reinstatement. The conditions, therefore, to this extent is hereby read down and modified. Let the petitioner by virtue of the order dated 14.2.2007 be allowed to join his place of posting. The authorities will thereafter be at liberty to take such steps for adjustment of these amounts from the salary and wages of the petitioner keeping in view that the petitioner has another 7-8 years of service in this regard. Insofar as the order with regard to denial of back wages to the petitioner is concerned this Court refuses to express any opinion at this stage but only gives liberty to the petitioner to first join the post and thereafter raise his grievance before the competent authority afresh. The competent authority will reconsider the matter in light of the prevalent rules and the law on this issue and they can pass appropriate orders in this regard accordingly. If the order is to the detriment of the interest of the petitioner he may be well advised to move any forum which he thinks appropriate in this regard. 4. This writ application stands disposed of with the above direction.