ORDER R.K. Merathia, J. 1. Heard the parties finally. 2. Petitioner has challenged Memo No. 2663 dated 10.9.2003 (Annexure-5) terminating him from services. 3. Mr. Mokhtar Ahmad, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that petitioner was going to retire in December, 2004 and at the fag end of service, on the complaint made by one Member of Parliament that the petitioner was appointed on the basis of forged caste certificate, petitioner was terminated from service. He further submitted that in any event termination is harsh and at best petitioner could be punished with compulsory retirement. 4. State counsel supported the impugned order. 5. Petitioner was appointed on 15.11.1965 as watchman and was posted at Primary Health Centre, Kharsawan. A complaint was made by one Member of Parliament that petitioner was appointed on the basis of forged caste certificate that he belonged to Scheduled Tribe (Ho). On 5.11.1996, he was suspended. On enquiry, the allegations were found not correct and suspension was revoked and petitioner was reinstated by order dated 10.2.1998. Thereafter, a show cause notice dated 20.2.2003 was issued to the petitioner as to why disciplinary proceeding should not be started against him for getting employment on the basis of forged certificate of Scheduled Tribe, though he belonged to backward class. Petitioner filed his show-cause saying that on the basis of his title-'Soy', inherited from his father, he was a scheduled tribe. A joint enquiry committee was constituted. It was found that petitioner is by caste 'Tanti' (backward class), and that the earlier enquiry report was wrong and order was passed to take action against earlier Enquiry Officer also. On the basis of such report, petitioner was terminated by the impugned order. 6. Thus, it appears that though petitioner was exonerated by the enquiry officer earlier, but thereafter a joint enquiry committed was constituted and a detailed report was submitted holding petitioner and the earlier Enquiry Officer guilty. On the basis of this report, a decision was taken to take action against the petitioner. Accordingly, a fresh show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 2.11.2000. followed by reminders. Petitioner could not substantiate his defence. Ultimately, he was terminated by the impugned order on the ground that he got employment on the basis of forged caste certificate. 7. Mr. Ahmed, appearing for the petitioner, could not challenge the impugned order on merits. Accordingly, a fresh show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 2.11.2000. followed by reminders. Petitioner could not substantiate his defence. Ultimately, he was terminated by the impugned order on the ground that he got employment on the basis of forged caste certificate. 7. Mr. Ahmed, appearing for the petitioner, could not challenge the impugned order on merits. However, he submitted that the petitioner had served for about 38 years and in that view of the matter at least, the punishment of termination be converted in compulsory retirement. 8. The petitioner belongs to backward class. He worked for about 38 years before he was terminated on 10.9.2003. He was going to retire in December, 2004. Accordingly, instead of remanding back, this old matter for reconsideration on the question of punishment, the punishment of termination is converted into compulsory retirement. 9. Accordingly, petitioner should be given the pensionary benefits in accordance with law, as a compulsorily retired employee, as early as possible and preferably within six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 10. This order, passed in peculiar facts of this case, will not be treated as precedent. 11. With these observations and directions. this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.