JUDGMENT : - Hon'ble Dr. KOTHARI, J.—The present old writ petition of 1998 filed by Laxmi Lal Maheshwari, who has expired during the long waiting period in the dockets of the Court on 8/4/2013, without being able to see the success of his case. 2. This petition was filed against his compulsory retirement order dated 9/5/1984, which was upheld by the Appellate Authority also on 1.7.1997 and aggrieved of both these orders, he had filed the present writ petition, spread into 110 pages with documents annexed with writ petition, the bulky record swelled to 345 pages, to which a reply was filed by the respondent Department also and after lengthy arguments of learned counsels, a brief written submission has also been submitted in the Court on the conclusion of arguments & thus, it is being disposed of by this Court by this order. 3. Brief facts considered apposite are that the petitioner having being appointed as LDC in the office of Commander, N.C.C. Group Headquarters, Udaipur on 5.1.1963 was promoted to the post of UDC on 10.5.1978. The incident for which the petitioner faced criminal trial as also the disciplinary proceedings pertains to the Month of February, 1978, when working as UDC and holding the additional charge of Cashier in the office of respondents, the FVC (Fully Vouched Contingent) Bill No.73 for the sum of Rs.505.85 for making petty payments of the respondent department, like water and electricity bills etc., was drawn by the petitioner and on account of alleged forgery, the said bill was drawn from the State Treasury for the sum of Rs.9505.85, adding the figure 9 on the left side of the said bill at four places and for this alleged fraud and forgery, the petitioner faced the criminal trial in criminal case no. 42/89 – State vs. Laxmi Lal, in which the court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No.3, Udaipur trying the petitioner under Section 420 and 468 IPC fully exonerated the petitioner vide order dated 17.4.1996. A copy of the said order is placed on record as Annex.36. The details of said order will be discussed slightly later. But, despite the aforesaid criminal trial, the respondent NCC Directorate of Rajasthan at Jaipur independently also initiated disciplinary action against the petitioner vide Charge Sheet dated 21.5.1979. 4. A copy of the said order is placed on record as Annex.36. The details of said order will be discussed slightly later. But, despite the aforesaid criminal trial, the respondent NCC Directorate of Rajasthan at Jaipur independently also initiated disciplinary action against the petitioner vide Charge Sheet dated 21.5.1979. 4. In the said inquiry, the petitioner appears to have not participated on account of facing criminal trial on the same set of facts & material against him and, therefore, an ex-parte inquiry report was given against him and on the basis of same he was ordered to be compulsorily retired vide order dated 9/5/1984. The appeal filed by the petitioner against the said order also could not bring any fruitful result, even though by that time his acquittal order dated 17/4/1996 had come, but the appeal also came to be dismissed by the concerned Special Secretary of the Education Department of Govt. of Rajasthan on 1/7/1997. Copies of these two impugned orders are placed on record as Annex.17 and 43. The present writ petition was filed by the petitioner in this Court on 10/2/1998 and same was admitted after hearing both the parties on 11/11/2005 after show cause notices were issued on 21/4/1998 and hearing was directed to be expedited but the hearing of the said case was deferred for one reason or the other and in the meanwhile the petitioner died on 8/4/2013 and, thereafter, his legal representatives were taken on record on 4/9/2013 & the matter was heard at length by this Court on 18/2/2014. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Manoj Bhandari urged that the charges framed against the petitioner were on the basis of case set up against him in the criminal trial and though the charge sheet does not talk of any embezzlement by the petitioner or even facilitating withdrawal of excess amount of Rs.9000/- in FVC Bill No.73 from the Treasury, the petitioner, who had rendered unblemished service of 20 years was abruptly & compulsorily retired from the said service even though later on, the competent criminal court acquitted him fully & honorably of the said charges, as there was actually no role of the petitioner in making the said forgery, which happened in the office of State Treasury as would be clear from the prosecution witnesses examined by the said court. He also urged that the charges framed against the petitioner clearly show that the charges framed were about the minor irregularity of making a Duplicate Bill for the same amount of Rs.505.85 upon the directions of his superior to make those petty payments of office, without mentioning the word `Duplicate' in Red ink though the said duplicate bill was again issued in the month of March for Rs.505.85 at the direction of higher authority only and, thus, all such irregularities even if they can be said to be one, the punishment of compulsory retirement of the petitioner was harsh and absolutely disproportionate and his appeal too against the said compulsory retirement order was rejected summarily by the appellate authority by wholly non-speaking and laconic order without even fully examining & appreciating his acquittal order by the competent court and, therefore, both these impugned orders deserve to be quashed. 6. Mr. Manoj Bhandari relied upon several case laws in support of his contentions, which are enumerated below and would be discussed a while later. (i) Capt. M.Paul Anthony vs. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. - (1999) 3 SCC 679 ; (ii) Union of India vs. K.A.Kittu & Ors. - (2001) 1 SCC 65 ; (iii) State of U.P. vs. Shatrughan Lal & Anr. - (1998) 6 SCC 651 ; (iv) M.V. Bijlani vs. Union of India Ors. - (2006) 5 SCC 88 ; (v) G.M. Tank vs. State of Gujarat & Ors. - (2006) 5 SCC 446 ; (vi) State of Utaranchal & Ors. vs. Kharak Singh – (2008) 8 SCC 236 . 7. On the other hand, Mr. M.R. Singhvi, Sr. Advocate along with Mr. Bhavit Sharma appearing for the respondents vehemently opposed the writ petition and supported the impugned orders while delineating the narrow scope of jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for not to sit as appellate court. 7. On the other hand, Mr. M.R. Singhvi, Sr. Advocate along with Mr. Bhavit Sharma appearing for the respondents vehemently opposed the writ petition and supported the impugned orders while delineating the narrow scope of jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for not to sit as appellate court. He also urged that the acquittal of the petitioner by the criminal court is of no consequence inasmuch as the said acquittal order was not even placed before the disciplinary authority and since the disciplinary action and criminal trial operates in different fields and both can go simultaneously, therefore, it was for the petitioner to lead appropriate defence in the disciplinary proceedings in his own favour but not having done so and ex parte proceedings having been drawn against him, the petitioner cannot raise the grievance of breach of principles of natural justice at this stage. 8. Mr. M.R. Singhvi relying upon couple of judgments for the aforesaid proposition also submitted that the charge no.3 also included indictment for facilitating fraudulent withdrawal of said FVC Bill No.73 and consequently the punishment of compulsory retirement imposed upon him is justified and the same deserves to be upheld by this Court. 9. I have heard the learned counsels at length and perused the record and judgments cited at the bar. 10. There is no dispute on the legal proposition as canvassed by the learned counsel for the respondents, Mr. M.R.Singhvi, Sr. Advocate that the disciplinary proceedings and criminal trial can be proceeded simultaneously as the scope and area of the two is different and so also the parameters on the basis of which indictment or acquittal of the Govt. servant are different and the purpose of holding the two proceedings simultaneously may be permissible. M.R.Singhvi, Sr. Advocate that the disciplinary proceedings and criminal trial can be proceeded simultaneously as the scope and area of the two is different and so also the parameters on the basis of which indictment or acquittal of the Govt. servant are different and the purpose of holding the two proceedings simultaneously may be permissible. But the stark reality of the present case is that the petitioner working as UDC in the respondent office has been clearly found to be not guilty by the criminal court and while doing so the competent court has found that the FVC Bill No.73 prepared by the petitioner under the authority of his superior was sent to the State Treasury office only for the sum of Rs.505.85, whereas, after being entered and passed there for Rs.9505.85 in the Treasury office, the said approved bill was sent back with the peon of the respondent office Shri Man Singh, who handed over the approved bill to the present petitioner but the Bank official, who was examined by the court & who gave the payment of said approved bill, stated that the payment was given to one Rajendra Kumar Sharma and not to the present petitioner – Laxmilal Maheshwari and apparently & prima facie, therefore, it appears that the petitioner was neither involved in that nor he committed any forgery in adding the figure 9 before the mathematical figure 505.85 in the said FVC Bill No.73 nor he has withdrawn the said excess money from the Bank and, therefore, did not stand to gain illegally from such forgery and, therefore, after examining all relevant witnesses, the petitioner was fully exonerated by the competent criminal court, which judgment is said to have become final. 11. Coupled with this fact, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Treasury record was not even summoned by the disciplinary authority while holding the inquiry against the petitioner, albeit ex-parte and, therefore, in the absence of any material against the petitioner, the charges framed against him, which even did not clearly impute any forgery or fraud by the petitioner but were only for minor irregularities as aforesaid, the punishment of compulsory retirement could not be imposed upon the petitioner. 12. Let us now see the charges framed against the petitioner at this stage. 12. Let us now see the charges framed against the petitioner at this stage. The charges as quoted in the impugned order of compulsory retirement, of which the inquiry was held against him, are quoted below for ready reference:- “Charge – I That Shri L.L.Maheshwari while working as Casher in NCC Group HQs, Udaipur acted very negligently as he prepared a FVC bill in carbon copy for Rs.505.85 on 9-2-78 and entered the same in the bill register against item no.73 but he did not initial the above bill in token of correctness. The bill was sent to the treasury on 10-2-78 and was passed by the Treasury Officer on 13-2-78. This bill along with the Medical reimbursement bill duly passed by the Treasury was handed over by the token clerk to Shri Man Singh Cycle Swar on 14-2-78 which were further handed over to Shri Laxmi Lal Maheshwari cashier who also reached the treasury for the purpose. Bill FVC-73 was lost by Shri Maheshwari. After returning to the NCC Group Headquarters, he did not report the matter in written to his superior officers and kept silence over the loss of the bill. Thus he was negligent. Charge – II That Shri Maheshwari while working as cashier in the NCC Group Headquarters, Udaipur was keeping the Govt. money in single key chest, the key of which always remain with him and he used to take out the money as and when he required without any authority. Thus he acted un unauthorised way. Charge – III That Shri Maheshwari while working as cashier in NCC Group HQs. Udaipur should have acted as per Rule 109(2) of GF & AR regarding preparation of duplicate bill which he failed to do so. Thus he hided the facts from the Drawing and Disbursing Officer and facilitated the fraudulent drawal of the bill. Charge – IV That Shri Maheshwari while working as cashier in NCC Group HQs, Udaipur failed to maintain the receipt register and all the papers received in his branch were not entered in this register. However, he totally discontinued making entries in the receipt register from 11-5-78. Thus, he was negligent in performining his duties. Charge – V That Shri Maheshwari while working as cashier in NCC Group Headquarters, Udaipur showed the fake delivery of the letters for despatch. However, he totally discontinued making entries in the receipt register from 11-5-78. Thus, he was negligent in performining his duties. Charge – V That Shri Maheshwari while working as cashier in NCC Group Headquarters, Udaipur showed the fake delivery of the letters for despatch. Charge – VI That Shri Maheshwari while working as cashier in NCC Group Headquarters, Udaipur acted very carelessly, negligently and delayed in the detection of fraudulent drawal of bill FVC-73 dated 10-2-78 by not attending to the papers received from NCC Directorate Rajasthan, Jaipur. Charge – VII That Shri Maheshwari while working as cashier in NCC Group Headquarters, Udaipur contravened the provisions of Rule 74 of GR & AR. AS it was observed that he instead of writing and closing the cash daily, closed the cash book monthly and that too not properly. He also delayed in the preparation of monthly expenditure statement and that too without consulting the bill register. Thus, he did not perform his duties properly.” The finding of inquiry report and the operative portion of the impugned order are also quoted below for ready reference:- “No reply was given by Shri L.L. Maheshwari of the charges so framed against him. However, a regular enquiry was ordered under rule 16 of the RCS (CCA) Rules, 1958 and Sqn Ldr. M.S. Gujral OC 6 Raj Air Sqn NCC, Udaipur was appointed as Enquiry Officer. Shri Maheshwari declined to give any statement in his defence and thus the Enquiry Officer proceeded the enquiry on the basis of the documents and witnesses exparte and after conducting the regular enquiry into the charges levelled against Shri Maheshwari, the Enquiry Officer has given his report/findings. The report given by the Enquiry Officer has been carefully considered along with its records. In the light of findings given by the Enquiry Officer all charges have been found established against Shri Maheshwari, UDC-Cum-Cashier. The charge wise finding of the Enquiry Officer are as under:- (a) Shri Maheshwari did not inform instantly to his superior officer about the loss of FVC bill-73 dated 10.2.78 for the amount of Rs.505.85. He disclosed the loss of the said bill to Junior Acctt. of NCC Group Headquarters, Udaipur only after four to five days. FVC Bill No.73 dated 10.2.78 was taken into possession by Shri Maheshwari from Shri Man Singh Cycle Swar. He disclosed the loss of the said bill to Junior Acctt. of NCC Group Headquarters, Udaipur only after four to five days. FVC Bill No.73 dated 10.2.78 was taken into possession by Shri Maheshwari from Shri Man Singh Cycle Swar. Lost FVC Bill.73 dated 10.2.78 which was finally forged to read as Rs.9505.85 on dated 14.2.78 as per the Treasury register of payment with the entry No.64197 annotated therein. (b) He wilfully dis-regarded the norms of a cashier by keeping the Govt. money in single key chest. (c) He wilfully dis-regarded the rule 109(2) of GF & AR and proceeded to prepare a duplicate bill FVC-73 dated 27 March, 78 without the legible and explicit annotation in red ink of the word duplicate in block capital letters. The payment of this duplicate FVC bill No.73 dated 27 March, 78 was affected on 31st Mar,78. He failed to inform the drawing and disbursing officer with a malafide intention. (d) He willfully dis-continued making entries in the receipt register of the mail that was being received by him. The negligent act leads the court to deduce that Shri Maheshwari had ulterior motive to hide the facts by not dating the mail receipt register. (e) He willfully inserted an entry in the mail despatch register as having sent the reply tot he letter No.11744/State/Acctts/77-78 dated 30-3-78 received from NCC Directorate Rajasthan, Jaipur. The letter purported to have been originated as reply to the NCC Directorate letter had reference No.303/Q-1/78-79/Accts/106 dated 25-4-78. This he had done to keep his malafide intention activities under cloud to enable the fraudulent drawal of Rs.9,505.85 (f) He willfully detracted from the path of rules and regulations laid down for the cashier of NCC Group HQs, Udaipur. He chose to adopt careless and negligent attitude. He failed to detect the fraudulent drawal of Rs.9,505.85 vide FVC-73 dated 10-2-78 inspite of NCC Directorate Rajasthan Jaipur had given enough hint to act upon, through the letter of quarries and a telegram dated 11-5-78 which had asked about the FVC-73 dated 10-2-78 for Rs.9,505.85. (g) He wilfully contravened the provisions of Rule 74 of GF & AR by not writing and closing the cash book daily instead he had been closing the cash book monthly. He had carelessly not cross checked thoroughly with the bill register while preparing the monthly expenditure statement. (g) He wilfully contravened the provisions of Rule 74 of GF & AR by not writing and closing the cash book daily instead he had been closing the cash book monthly. He had carelessly not cross checked thoroughly with the bill register while preparing the monthly expenditure statement. Having thus considered the Enquiry Report given by the Enquiry Officer for the charges No.I to VII as having been found proved against Shri Maheshwari and since he has been found guilty in facilitating the fraudulent drawal of FVC bill for Rs.9,505.85 and loss of this amount to the Government in the form of embezzlement, he deserves to be strictly penalised. Therefore, in terms of provisions contained in Rule 14 (V) of RCS (CCA) Rules, 1958, Shri Maheshwari, UDC-Cum-Cashier of NCC Group HQs, Udaipur, is hereby compulsorily retired from the service with immediate effect. The suspension period of Shri L.L. Maheshwari will be treated as on duty for the purpose of pension, fixation of pay etc. He will not be paid any pay and allowances for the suspension period except the subsistence grant already paid to him. Sd/- (K.M.PONAPPA) AIR COMMODORE DIRECTOR N.C.C.” 13. Now let us have a look on the relevant portion of the judgment of the learned Addl. He will not be paid any pay and allowances for the suspension period except the subsistence grant already paid to him. Sd/- (K.M.PONAPPA) AIR COMMODORE DIRECTOR N.C.C.” 13. Now let us have a look on the relevant portion of the judgment of the learned Addl. He will not be paid any pay and allowances for the suspension period except the subsistence grant already paid to him. Sd/- (K.M.PONAPPA) AIR COMMODORE DIRECTOR N.C.C.” 13. Now let us have a look on the relevant portion of the judgment of the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No.3, Udaipur exonerating the present petitioner from the offence under Sec. 420 and 468 IPC for which he was tried: ^^9- bl ekeys ds rF;ksa dks lqLi"V djus ds fy, vfHk;kstu rF;ksa ,oa i=koyh esa izLrqr nLrkostkr ds voyksdu us ;g rF; cuk gs fd vfHk;qä dekaMj ,u-lh-lh- gsMDokVZj] mn;iqj ds dk;kZy; esa dsf'k;j ds in ij fu;qä gksdj fcy cukrk gSA fcy dks"k dk;kZy; Hksrk gS] okil izkIr djrk gS] cSad esa fcy ikl djds jkf'k izkIr djrk gSA;g fcy izn'kZ ih-15 fnukad 10-02-78 dks ,Q-bZ-lh- fcy ua- 173 jkf'k :i;s 505-85 iSls dk cuk;k x;k tks fd fcy jftLVj esa izn'kZ ih-4 ls vadu gSA bldks 10-02-78 dks izn'kZ Mh-13 jftLVj esa Øekad 77 ij dks"k dk;kZy; esa fHktok;k x;k ftl ij fd dks"k dk;kZy; ds deZpkjh }kjk izkfIr ds gLrk{kj , ls ch gSA Vªstjh fcy fjflIV jftLVj esa tks fd 10-02-78 dk tks fcy gS LØksy ua- 64197 ls ikl gqvk] bldk izn'kZ Mh-11 esa banzkt gS bl rjg ls tks fcy :i;s 505-85 iSls dk ,u-lh-lh- gSMDokVZj ls izn'kZ ih-15 cuk;k tkdj dks"k dk;kZy; esa fHktok;k x;k og okil izkIr ugha gqvk] fQj ,u-lh-lh- gSMDokVZj dks ;g /;ku esa vk;k fd mä fcy :i;s 9]505-85 iSls dk ikl gqvk tcfd 505-85 iSls dk gh mä fcy cuk;k x;k FkkA ,slk ogka ij gks x;k] fcy fdlds gkFk esa pyk x;k] dgka ls [kks x;k vkSj fdlus ;g jkf'k izkIr dj yh bldh Nkuchu dh x;h rks izn'kZ ih-15 esa 9]000@& ds vad c<+k;s x;s dks"k dk;kZy; ls Hkh 9]505-85 iSls dk gh fcy ikl gqvk] tcfd fcy dks"k dk;kZy; esa izn'kZ Mh 13 ls 505-85 iSls gh dks"k dk;kZy; esa fHktok;k x;k FkkA 10- mä fcy dks fof/k foKku iz;ksx'kkyk t;iqj fHktok;k x;k ftldh fjiksVZ ih-119 izkIr gqbZaA bl fjiksVZ ls ;g ik;k x;k gS fd izn'kZ ih-15 esa D;w-1] D;w-2] D;w-3] D;w-4 LFkku ij vFkkZr~ pkj LFkku ij 9]000@& ds vad c<+k;s x;s vkSj izn'kZ ih-16 LØksy jftLVj esa ,UVªh la-989 ch-D;w-13 LFkku ij 9 dk vad c<+k fn;k x;k bl rjg fcy tc Vªstjh Hkstk x;k rks mlds i'pkr~ bl jftLVj izn'kZ ih-16 esa 9 dk vad c<+k fn;k x;k vkSj izn'kZ ih-15 esa Hkh D;w-1 ls D;w-4 pkj LFkku ij ^^ukS** dk vad c<+kus ls 9]000@& :i;s dh jkf'k dh o`f) dj nh x;hA ;g rks fufoZokn gS fd mä dwV jpuk dh x;h] tc ;g fcy ikl gks rjg fcy tc Vªstjh Hkstk x;k rks mlds i'pkr~ bl jftLVj izn'kZ ih-16 esa 9 dk vad c<+k fn;k x;k vkSj izn'kZ ih-15 esa Hkh D;w-1 ls D;w-4 pkj LFkku ij ^^ukS** dk vad c<+kus ls 9]000@& :i;s dh jkf'k dh o`f) dj nh x;hA ;g rks fufoZokn gS fd mä dwV jpuk dh x;h] tc ;g fcy ikl gks tkrk gS vkSj okil ,u-lh-lh- gSMDokVZj ij u tk,] ijUrq jftLVj izn'kZ Mh-2 tks fd buds'kesaV jftLVj dgykrk gS esa bldh ,UVªh ugha gks rks ;g fcy ,u-lh-lh- gSMDokVZj ij vk;k gh ugha] Vªstjh ls 9]505-85 isls dk fcy izkIr gqvkA ?kVuk rF;ksa dk var ;gh ugha gksrk gS] oju~ dwV jpuk dh ijkdk"Vk bl lhek rd igqWprh gS fd Mªkbax fMLiflZax vf/kdkjh Hkkjrflag ds gLrk{kj Hkh QthZ dj fn;s tkrs gS vkSj tks lhy dekaMj ,u-lh-lh- xzqi gSMDokVZj] mn;iqj dh Hkqxrku ds fy, yxk;h x;h tks D;w-8] 9] 10 gS og Hkh QthZ cuk yh x;hA Nkis xyr yxk yh x;h] Mªkbax fMLiflZax vkWfQl ds gLrk{kj QthZ dj fy;s x;s vkSj cSad ls jktsUnz 'kekZ uke ds O;fä us mä jkf'k izkIr dj yh] xkSj ryc ;g Hkh gSa fd D;w-6 LFkku ij tgka jktsUnz 'kekZ us gLrk{kj fd;s ogka ij mlus ;g fy[kk fjlhOM 505-85 iSls] ijUrq cSad ls 9]505-58 iSls dk gh Hkqxrku gqvkA fof/k foKku iz;ksx'kkyk dh fjiksVZ izn'kZ ih-119 dk fjtYV bDtkfeus'ku 7 ftlesa ;g crk;k x;k gS fd D;w-142 tks jktsUnz 'kekZ ds gLrk{kj gS os D;w-1 o D;w-6 ftlesa fd ^^ukS** dk vad c<+k;k x;k mlls lacaf/kr gS ;k ugha bldh jk; dk;e ugha dh tk ldrhA mi;qZä urhts ls ;g rF; cuk fd fcy Vªstjh ls ikl gksus ds i'pkr~ ,u-lh-lh- dekaMj ds gLrk{kj QthZ cuk fy;s x;s] Nkis QthZ cuk yh x;h] jktsUnz 'kekZ uke ds O;fä ds gLrk{kj dj jkf'k izkIr dj yh x;hA iwjs vuqla/kku esa ;g rF; ugha gS fd mä —R; vfHk;qä y{ehyky us fd;k gksA dwV jpuk rks gqbZ gS] fdlus dh ;g Hkh irk ugha pwafd pwafd jktsUnz 'kekZ uke dk dksbZ O;fä ,u-lh-lh- dk;kZy; esa gS gh ugha] ij ,slh lk{; Hkh ugha gS fd vfHk;qä y{ehyky us dwV jpuk dh gksA 11- vfHk;kstu i{k dh vksj ls tks nwljk rF; izLrqr fd;k x;k og ;g gS fd izn'kZ ih-18 fcy ,Q-bZ-lh- 173 uEcj dk iqu% 27-3-78 dks vfHk;qä y{ehyky dsf'k;j us vkSj cuk fn;k vkSj dekaMj ts-,l- pM~<k ds gLrk{kj ls ;g fcy esa gS gh ugha] ij ,slh lk{; Hkh ugha gS fd vfHk;qä y{ehyky us dwV jpuk dh gksA 11- vfHk;kstu i{k dh vksj ls tks nwljk rF; izLrqr fd;k x;k og ;g gS fd izn'kZ ih-18 fcy ,Q-bZ-lh- 173 uEcj dk iqu% 27-3-78 dks vfHk;qä y{ehyky dsf'k;j us vkSj cuk fn;k vkSj dekaMj ts-,l- pM~<k ds gLrk{kj ls ;g fcy dks"k dk;kZy; Hkstk x;kA LØksy uEcj 20023 fnukad 28-03-78 }kjk ikl gks x;kA ;g fcy Mkd rkj foHkkx dh jkf'k pqdkus] tynk;&foHkkx ds iSls pqdkus ,oa ;k;kvyh ds Hkqxrku ckcr~ Fkk blds fy, vfHk;kstu i{k dk ;g dFku gS fd tc ,d fcy fnukad 10-02-78 dks cu pqdk Fkk rks ;g fcy 27-03-78 dks D;ksadj cuk;k x;k] vxj ;g fcy cuk;k Hkh x;k rks bl ij MqfIydsV fcy dk vad gksuk pkfg,] vf/kdkjh ds uksfVl esa yk;k tkuk pkfg, ij ;g lgh gks fd bl fcy dh jkf'k 505-85 iSls ds Vªstjh ds ikl gq, gSaA mä rhuksa Mkdrkj foHkkx] tynk; foHkkx] ;k;kvyh dks pqdkus esa gh ;g jkf'k nh x;hA bldk vFkZ ;g gqvk fd fnukad 10-2-78 dk fcy vkSj 27-3-78 dk fcy nksuksa ,d gh rjg ds pqdkus ds fy, nks fcy cus] nwljk fcy tks cuk;k x;k mlds fy, vfHk;qä dks ftEesnkj ekuk tkosA ;g vfHk;kstu i{k dk dFku gSA tcfd izfrj{kk esa ;g dFku gS fd pwafd ekpZ dk efguk Fkk 31-3-78 dks foÙkh; o"kZ lekIr gks jgk Fkk ml en esa ls ;g jkf'k pqdkuh vko';d Fkh vkSj ;g jkf'k pqdkus ds fy, tc igyk fcy ugha feyk rks ;g nwljk fcy cuk;kA blesa vfHk;qä dh csbZekuh dk mís'; D;k jgk D;ksafd tks jkf'k izkIr gqbZ mudks fjdkWMZ esa O;ä fd;k x;k vkSj ftudks pqdkuk Fkk mudks gh pqdk;k x;kA muds ikl ckdh jg ugha ldrk Fkk fQj Hkh vfHk;kstu dk ;gh tks jgk fd nwljk fcy MqfIydsV ugha fy[kk mUgsa vf/kdkjh ds Kku esa mä rF; ugha yk;s x;s blfy, vfHk;qä nwljk fcy cukus esa dwV jpuk esa nks"kh gSaA 12- tSlk fd geus Åij fuosnu fd;k gS vc gekjs lkeus nks rjg ds rF; jgrs gS fd ^^D;k izFke fcy vfHk;qä y{ehyky ds ikl vk;k Fkk\** blds fy, vfHk;kstu us ekuflag lkbZfdy lokj ih-M-1 ds c;ku djok;s ftlesa mldk ;g dFku gS fd og Vªstjh ls fcy ykus dk dke djrk Fkk vkSj ;g fcy Hkh laHkor;k og yk;k gks ugha Hkh yk;k gks nks fcy lkFk yk;k lkFk yk;k Fkk mlds jax rF; jgrs gS fd ^^D;k izFke fcy vfHk;qä y{ehyky ds ikl vk;k Fkk\** blds fy, vfHk;kstu us ekuflag lkbZfdy lokj ih-M-1 ds c;ku djok;s ftlesa mldk ;g dFku gS fd og Vªstjh ls fcy ykus dk dke djrk Fkk vkSj ;g fcy Hkh laHkor;k og yk;k gks ugha Hkh yk;k gks nks fcy lkFk yk;k lkFk yk;k Fkk mlds jax ls lkbZt ls irk ugha ;g ekewyh i<+k fy[kk O;fä gSA Vªstjh ls fcy okil nsus ds dgha gLrk{kj u rks ekuflag ls fy;s x;s vkSj u gh vfHk;qä y{ehyky ls fy;s x;sA blfy, Vªstjh ls ;g fcy okil ekuflag vxj ekSf[kd :i ls ;g dgrk Hkh og yk;k rks ;g lansgkLin gS ekuflag ih-M-1 xokg fnXHkzfer o vius c;kuksa ij vfLFkj gS vius dFkuksa dks ckj ckj cnyrk gS] vkHkkl d;kl ls dfku djrk gSA blds c;kuksa ij fo'okl ugha fd;k tk ldrk gSA txoarflag ih-M-2 ysfVusaV dusZy ,u-lh- xzqi dekaMj] mn;iqj ds in ij Fkk ftlus dFku fd;k fd y{ehyky muds vkWfQl esa dke djrk Fkk fMIVh Mk;jsDVj dk VsyhQksu vk;k Fkk fd 9]505 dqN iSls fcy ls fudkys bl ij mlus vfHk;qä ls iwNk vkSj mls ;g funsZ'k fn;k fd og Vªstjh esa tkdj irk djsa rks vfHk;qä us irk dj crk;k fd ewy :i ls 505-85 iSls dk gh cuk Fkk ^^ukS** dk vad c<+k fn;k x;k Fkk vkSj 9]000@& dk xM+cM+ gS tks jkf'k pqdkuh Fkh ftlds fy, fcy cuk;k x;k mldk Hkqxrku vfHk;qä y{ehyky us vkSj 25-27 fnu ckn nwljk fcy rhuksa gh jkf'k dk cuk;k x;k ml ij ogha uEcj Mkys x;s fQj Hkh baDok;jh dh rks ;g ik;k fd ewy fcy Vªstjh ls gksdj vfHk;qä dks fey x;k Fkk tks lkbZfdy lokj us ykdj fn;k Fkk vkSj mls vfHk;qä ij 'kd gksus ls iqfyl Fkkuk vackekrk esa bÙkyk izn'kZ ih-1 ntZ djok;h ftldh pSd izn'kZ ih-2 gS ftl ij mlds gLrk{kj gSA izn'kZ ih-7 ls izn'kZ ih-12 os nLrkost gS tks Vªstjh vkSj bl xokg ds chp esa i=kpkj gqvkA Hkksikyflag ih-M-3 tqfu;j ,dkmaVsaV ,u-lh-lh- gSMDokVZj mn;iqj esa Fkk og ;g fcy Vªstjh esa Hkstus dk leFkZu djrk gSA nwljk fcy tks cuk;k ml ij MqfIydsV ugha fy[kk tc mlus vfHk;qä ls iwNk fd nksckjk fcy D;ksa fudkyk rks vfHk;qä us tokc fn;k fd igys okyk fcy [kksus dh fjiksVZ dj nh gS vkSj vxj fcy [kks tkrk gS rks nwljk fcy cuk;k tkrk gS [kksus dh fjiksVZ dh tkrh gS mldks Vªstjh esa Hkstus dk leFkZu djrk gSA nwljk fcy tks cuk;k ml ij MqfIydsV ugha fy[kk tc mlus vfHk;qä ls iwNk fd nksckjk fcy D;ksa fudkyk rks vfHk;qä us tokc fn;k fd igys okyk fcy [kksus dh fjiksVZ dj nh gS vkSj vxj fcy [kks tkrk gS rks nwljk fcy cuk;k tkrk gS [kksus dh fjiksVZ dh tkrh gS mldks MqfIydsV fcy dgrs gS] ij bl xokg ds c;ku ls ;g vFkZ fudyrk gS fd igys fcy [kks x;k bldk irk py x;k rRi'pkr~ nwljk fcy cuk;k x;k bldk vk'k; ;g gqvk fd dsf'k;j us vius vki gh nwljk fcy cuk fn;k gks ,slh ckr ugha gSa] cfYd foHkkx esa bldh tkudkjh gks pqdh FkhA jkexksiky vxzoky ih-M-4 Hkh vU; deZpkjh gS ftldk ;g dFku gS fd funs'kky;] t;iqj ls 9]505-85 iSls dh lwpuk vk;h rks y{ehyky ls iwNk rks mlus ;g tokc fn;k Fkk fd ;g jde vius uke ugha gS] mlus og Hkksiky flag ckcst us vf/kdkjh dks uksfVl esa Mky fn;k fd fcy [kks x;kA nwljk jkexksiky ikjh[k ih-M-5 gSa tks lgk;d ys[kkf/kdkjh] ,u-lh-lh- Mk;jsDVj t;iqj esa Fkk mlus bl ekeys esa tk¡p dh Fkh rks fjiksVZ izn'kZ ih-13 ds layXu izn'kZ ih-14 mlus fn;k FkkA 9]000@& dk xcu ik;k FkkA lqesjflag ih-M-6 us Hkh ;g jkf'k mBh Fkh mldh gSMDokVZj esa fjiksVZ dh FkhA fulkj vgen ih-M-7 ys[kkdkj gS tks fd mu fnuksa dks"k dk;kZy; esa fu;qä Fkk vkSj LØksy jftLVj esa vadu djrk Fkk mlus izn'kZ ih-16 ij Øekad la[;k 98 esa D;w-13 ij fy[kk Fkk ;g ukS dk vad tks ukS gtkj dh jkf'k c<+kus ds fy, fd;k x;k ;g mlds gkFk dk fy[kk gqvk ugha gS] ;g ckn esa dj fy;k x;kA xokg oYyHknkl ih-M-8 tks dks"k dk;kZy; esa lgk;d ys[kk vf/kdkjh fcy ikl djrk gS ftlds gLrk{kj izn'kZ ih-15 ij lh ls Mh gS mlus vius c;kuksa esa bu rF;ksa dk leFkZu fd;k fd ^^ukS** dk vad c<+dj dwV jpuk dh x;h vkSj mlds gLrk{kj lh ls Mh gS oSls ;g xokg gS ;g ÝkstZjh dgka gqbZ bldk Li"Vhdj.k ugha gks ikrk gS ;g [kkyh 9]505-85 iSls dk ikl dj fn;k gLrk{kj djrk gSA fcy dks vPNh rjg D;ksa ugha ns[kk blds ckjs esa vius tokcksa esa vius vkidks fNikus ds vykok rFkk Vkyus ds vykok dqN ugha gSA xokg ih-M-9 egs'kpanz ys[kkdkj gS ftlds gLrk{kj izn'kZ ih-15 ij ,Dl ls okbZ Lo;a ds gksus ls badkj djrk gS vkSj ;g dFku gS ;g [kkyh 9]505-85 iSls dk ikl dj fn;k gLrk{kj djrk gSA fcy dks vPNh rjg D;ksa ugha ns[kk blds ckjs esa vius tokcksa esa vius vkidks fNikus ds vykok rFkk Vkyus ds vykok dqN ugha gSA xokg ih-M-9 egs'kpanz ys[kkdkj gS ftlds gLrk{kj izn'kZ ih-15 ij ,Dl ls okbZ Lo;a ds gksus ls badkj djrk gS vkSj ;g dFku djrk gS fd fdlds }kjk QthZ cuk;s x;s gS oSls bu gLrk{kjksa dh tkWp ugha djok;h x;h gSA ;s gLrk{kj ds ckjs esa ;gh ekuk x;k fd bl xokg ds >waBs cksyus dh laHkkouk gS] D;ksafd bUgksaus va/kk gksdj dwV jfpr fcy dks ikl dj fn;kA Jh dj.kflag ih-M-10 ,l-ch-ch-ts- 'kk[kk psVd ldZy mn;iqj esa dsf'k;j ds in ij Fkk mlus izn'kZ ih-15 dh jkf'k 9]505-85 iSls jktsUnz 'kekZ uked O;fä dks pqdk;h izn'kZ ih-15 ij bZ ls ,Q mlds gLrk{kj gSA jktsUnz 'kekZ uke ds O;fä dks ugha igpkurkA cSad esa lk/kkj.kr;k Hkqxrku MªkbZax fMLiflZax }kjk gLrk{kj tks izekf.kr fd;k tkrk gS mlds vk/kkj ij dj fn;k tkrk gSA oSls Nkiksa dk feyku vkSj gLrk{kjksa dk feyku dj fy;k tkos rks Bhd jgrk] ysfdu bl ekeys esa dwV jpuk bruh pkykdh vkSj gksf'k;kjh ls dh x;h Fkh fd lkekU; Øe esa ;g ckr idM+ esa vkuk laHko ugha gSA clar dqekj ih-M-11 tks 27-03-78 dks Vªstjh vkWfQl esa fjyhfoax dydZ Fkk mlus izn'kZ ih-17 esa banzkt fd;k Fkk tks fd izn'kZ ih-18 gSA ;g rks lgh gS fd fdlh us mä fcy is'k gksus ds ckjs esa dksbZ fookn ugha fd;k gSA ehëkyky ih-M-12 LØksy uEcj esa ,UVªh djus dk dFku djrk gS ftlesa 9]000@& dk vad ugha FkkA vtqZu yky ih-Mh- 13 izn'kZ ih-15 ij fcy tc cSad esa v;k rks VkWdu b';q fd;k Fkk ml le; 9]505-85 iSls dk gh fcy FkkA Qdhjpan ih-M-14 jkT; foÙkh; foKku iz;ksx'kkyk esa lgk;d funs'kd izys[k [k.M ds in dk dk;Zjr jgk gS mlus Vªsfuax dh fons'k x;k Vªsfuax ysdj vk;k rks bl ekeys ds nLrkost ,Q-oh-lh- fcy mls izkIr gqvk tks izn'kZ ih-15 gS ml ij mlus lkjs feyku fd;k vkSj fjiksVZ izn'kZ ih-119 cuk;h ftldk fd fo'ys"k.k Åij dj pqds gSA ysfVusaV duZy Hkjrflag ih-M-15 ;|fi fnukad 9-7-80 dks lk{; ds :i esa esa mifLFkr vk;k] ijUrq mlds i'pkr~ mudh e`R;q gks tkus ls muds c;ku ugha gks lds bUgha ds gLrk{kj Mªkbax fMLiflZax vkWfQlj ds :i esa QthZ cuk fy;s x;s FksA bl xokg ds ekSr gks tkus vkSj fjiksVZ izn'kZ ih-119 cuk;h ftldk fd fo'ys"k.k Åij dj pqds gSA ysfVusaV duZy Hkjrflag ih-M-15 ;|fi fnukad 9-7-80 dks lk{; ds :i esa esa mifLFkr vk;k] ijUrq mlds i'pkr~ mudh e`R;q gks tkus ls muds c;ku ugha gks lds bUgha ds gLrk{kj Mªkbax fMLiflZax vkWfQlj ds :i esa QthZ cuk fy;s x;s FksA bl xokg ds ekSr gks tkus ekeys ds rF;ksa ij bldh vksj ls dksbZ izdk'k ugha iM+rk gSA iq:"kksÙkeyky ih-M-16 tkWp vf/kdkjh tks lgk;d ys[kk vf/kdkjh ,u-lh-lh- Mk;jsDVªsV esa Fkk mUgksaus tkWp dh ftldh fjiksVZ izn'kZ ih-120 gSaA tkWp fjiksVZ dks lk{; dk vad ugha ekurs gS] ysfdu tks vly nLrkost bUgksaus voyksdu fd;k mudk geus gekjk fu"d"kZ fudkyus ds fy, oSls gh Åij foosfpr dj fn;k gSaA estj ts-,l- pïk ih-M-17 nwljk fcy izn'kZ ih-18 vius gLrk{kjksa ls Hkstus dk dFku djrs gSA eqjkjhyky ih-M-18 tks cSad esa vflLVsaV ,dkmUVsaV ds in ij Fkk izn'kZ ih-15 mlus is'k fd;k Fkk vkSj [ktkuph ds ikl Hkstk Fkk gehnqYyk [kku ih-M- 19 ,l-,p-vks- Fkkuk vackekrk Fkk mls og vuqla/kku feyk Fkk vkSj mlus blesa tkWp dh nLrkostkr izn'kZ ih-16] izn'kZ ih-121 ls 123 izkIr fd;sA yg:yky ih-M-20 ,u-lh-lh- gSMDokVZj dh fjiksVZ Fkkus ij izkIr gksus ij eqdíek ntZ djus dk dFku djrk gSA izn'kZ ih-1]2 ij mlds gLrk{kj gSA ,Q-,l-,y- gsrq nLrkost fy;s x;s gSA rgjhj dh dkcZu dkWih izn'kZ ih-124 ij mlds gLrk{kj gSA izn'kZ ih-123 mls izkIr gqbZA 13- vfHk;qä y{ehyky ds c;ku eqyfte esa lHkh xokgku ds c;kuksa dk [kqyklk djrk gS ftlesa mldk ;g dFku gSa fd Vªstjh dk tks fcy ikl gqvk gS mldk mlls dksbZ laca/k ugha gSa cSad esa tks jkf'k vnk dh tkrh gS mldk Hkh mlls dksbZ laca/k ugha gSA jktsUnz 'kekZ uke ds O;fä dks og ugha tkurk] dkSu jkf'k mBk ys x;k mlls dksbZ laca/k ugha vkSj bl rjg xokg us blds f[kykQ dSls dgk tks izfØ;k viuk;h x;h mlds ckjs esa mUgksaus o.kZu fd;k Lo;a lk{kh Mh-M-1 ds :i esa mifLFkr gqvk vkSj mlus vius }kjk fd;s x;s dk;Z dk [kqyk;k fd;k ftlesa mlus dfku fd;k fd izn'kZ ih-15 :i;s 505-85 iS- dk fcy gh cuk;kA ftl ekuflag ds fy, ;g dgk tk jgk gS fd mlus fcy ysdj ds fn;k mlus mls dksbZ fcy ykdj ugha fn;k dsoy ,d esfMdy fcy Fkk tks ysdj fn;k FkkA ;g fcy Vªstjh esa Hkstus ds i'pkr~ mlds ikl dHkh okil ugha vk;kA mldk ;g Hkh dFku gS fd;k fd izn'kZ ih-15 :i;s 505-85 iS- dk fcy gh cuk;kA ftl ekuflag ds fy, ;g dgk tk jgk gS fd mlus fcy ysdj ds fn;k mlus mls dksbZ fcy ykdj ugha fn;k dsoy ,d esfMdy fcy Fkk tks ysdj fn;k FkkA ;g fcy Vªstjh esa Hkstus ds i'pkr~ mlds ikl dHkh okil ugha vk;kA mldk ;g Hkh dFku gS fd izn'kZ ih-18 mlus tqfu;j ,dkmUVsaV Hkksikyflag ckcsy ds funsZ'kkuqlkj nksckjk cuk;k ;|fi MqfIydsV ugha fy[kk gqvk gS ij fcy cuk;k x;k vkSj fcy dh jkf'k ftudks pqdkuh Fkh og pqdk;h x;hA 14- bl rjg ls tks f}rh; fcy izn'kZ ih-18 cuk;k x;k mlesa tks jkf'k :i;k 505-85 iSls mBk;s x;s og jkf'k ftudks pqdkuh Fkh ugha pqdkbZ x;h blesa vxj vfu;ferrk dk dksbZ dkj.k jgk gSa rks og ;g gks ldrk gS fd vfHk;qä us MqfIydsV 'kCn ugha fy[kk gks ysfdu ;g jkf'k mlus csbZekuhiwoZd izkIr ugha dh gSA nwljk ;g fcy fu;ekuqlkj lHkh jftLVjksa esa vadu dj izfØ;kRed :i ls fcy ikl gqvk gS] blfy, bl fcy dks dwV jfpr fcy ugha dgk tk ldrk gSA 15- tgka rd izFke fcy izn'kZ ih-15 dk iz'u gS vfHk;qä y{ehyky }kjk ewy :i ls 505-85 iSls dk gh fcy cuk;k x;k Vªstjh esa izfof"B izn'kZ Mh-13 gSA izn'kZ ih-13 ds jftLVj ls lkQ gs fd ml le; rd Hkh :i;s 505-85 iSls dk gh fcy ogka fHktok;k x;kA oYyHknkl ikjh[k ih-M-8] fulkj vgen ih-Mh-9 ftuds fd gLrk{kj izn'kZ ih-15 ij Øe'k% lh ls Mh o ,Dl ls okbz gS vkSj ;g ogha fd;s ftUgksaus fd bl fcy dks ikl fd;k vxj ;g bl fcy dks lkeU; Kku ls gh myVdj ns[krs rks bldh dwV jpuk 'kh'ks dh rjg lkQ utj vkrh gS] bu nksuksa us D;ksadj ;g /;ku ugha fn;k ;g dgus dh fLFkfr esa ge ugha gS] ijUrq bUgksaus vius ftEes ds drZO; dk ikyu ugha fd;k gSA dwV jpuk fdl rjg ls gks x;h ;g lkjk jgL; insZ esa gh gS] ijUrq mä nksuksa deZpkjh tks fd Vªstjh esa dk;Zjr Fks vkSj ogha ls fcy ikl gqvk rks ogha ls dwV jfpr gksdj cSad x;k vkSj ogha =qfV gqbZ gSA bl fcy esa vfHk;qä y{ehykyk us dwV jpuk dh gks mldk dksbZ ;ksxnku gks u rks ,slh dksbZ lk{; gS u gh ,slh dksbZ ifjfLFkfr gS tks fd mls bl vijk/k esa fyIr djrh gksA ;gka ij ;g Hkh mYys[k dj fn;k tkuk mfpr le>rk gwa fd vfHk;kstu ogha ls dwV jfpr gksdj cSad x;k vkSj ogha =qfV gqbZ gSA bl fcy esa vfHk;qä y{ehykyk us dwV jpuk dh gks mldk dksbZ ;ksxnku gks u rks ,slh dksbZ lk{; gS u gh ,slh dksbZ ifjfLFkfr gS tks fd mls bl vijk/k esa fyIr djrh gksA ;gka ij ;g Hkh mYys[k dj fn;k tkuk mfpr le>rk gwa fd vfHk;kstu us vfHk;qä ij vijk/k MqfIydsV fcy u fy[kus ds vk/kkj ij cuk;k gS] ysfdu Mªkbax fMliflZax vkWfQlj ysQ- duZy ts-,l- pïk ds uke ls gLrk{kj fd;s gSA mUgksaus mä jftLVj ns[kk gS vkSj nwljk fcy tks m/kj iSls pqdkus Fks mlh dk cuk;k x;k mlh ds fy, fy;k x;k gSA blfy, nwljs fcy ds fy, Hkh ;g dgk tk ldrk gS fd og dwV jfpr gSA tgka rd lalqxr fu;e lkekU; foÙkh; ys[kk fu;e lkekU; izfØ;kRed fu;e tks lkjs dk;kZy;ksa esa gksrs mudk vxj fdlh rjg ls mYya?ku gks x;k gks rks Hkh og vfHk;qä dks dwV jpuk ds vijk/k ls la;kftr ugha djrk gS vkSj dwV jpuk ds tks rRo gS mlesa ls dksbZ rRo vfHk;qä ds fy, lqlaxrrk esa ugha vkrs gSA vr% vfHk;qä y{ehyky us fookfnr fcy esa dwV jpuk dh gks dk rF; lansg ls ijs lkfcr ugha gksrk gSA tc vfHk;qä us fcy dwV jfpr gh ugha fd;k] mldh jkf'k Hkh mlds }kjk ugha mBk;h x;h rks csbZekuhiwoZd ;k NyiwoZd vfHk;qä us ;g jkf'k izkIr ugha dh gSA tgka rd nwljk fcy cukus dk iz'u gS tSlk fd ge Åij foosfpr dj pqds gS fd izfØ;kRed 'kCnkoyh] fu;ekoyh dk mYya?ku gks ldrk gS] ysfdu vijk/k djus dk —R; ugha gS tks jkf'k pqdkuh Fkh mlds fy, fcy cukdj mBk;k x;k gSA fu;ekuqlkj lHkh jftLVj esa vadu gSaA vr% ;g fd vfHk;qä us dwV jfpr fcy ls csbZekuhiwoZd jkf'k izkIr dh Fkh vFkok djus nh dk rF; Hkh lansg ls ijs lkfcr gksrk gSA fopkj.k fcUnq ua- rhu % 16- fopkj.k fcUnq ,d o nks ds udkjkRed fu/kkZj.k gks tkus ls vfHk;qä ds fo:) ;g rF; fd ^^mlus fookfnr fcy dh dwV jpuk dj NyiwoZd jkf'k izkIr dh gks o djus nh!** lansg ls ijs lkfcr ugha gksrk gSaA vr% vfHk;qä mlds fo:) fojfpr vkjksi varxZr /kkjk 468] 420 Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk esa nks"keqä gksus ;ksX; gSA vkns'k 17- Qyr% vfHk;qä y{ehyky mlds fo:) fojfpr vkjksi vUrxZr /kkjk 468] 420 Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk ls nks"keqä fd;k tkrk gSA vfHk;qä }kjk izLrqr tekur eqpyds fujLr fd;s tkrs izkIr dh gks o djus nh!** lansg ls ijs lkfcr ugha gksrk gSaA vr% vfHk;qä mlds fo:) fojfpr vkjksi varxZr /kkjk 468] 420 Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk esa nks"keqä gksus ;ksX; gSA vkns'k 17- Qyr% vfHk;qä y{ehyky mlds fo:) fojfpr vkjksi vUrxZr /kkjk 468] 420 Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk ls nks"keqä fd;k tkrk gSA vfHk;qä }kjk izLrqr tekur eqpyds fujLr fd;s tkrs gSA ¼f'koflag pkSgku½ 18- fu.kZ; vkt fnukad 17-04-96 dks [kqys U;k;ky; esa lquk;k x;kA ¼f'koflag pkSgku½ 14. The said acquittal order having been pronounced on 17/4/1996, there was no question of producing it before the disciplinary authority, who passed the order of compulsory retirement on 9/5/1984 itself, much prior to it, but the appellate authority was definitely apprised of the same & said acquittal order was placed on his record but despite that without discussing the same in detail, the appellate authority felt contended with the legal distinction of the standard of proof required in two types of proceedings against the same petitioner & relied solely on the findings of inquiry officer & cursorily upheld the order of compulsory retirement dated 9/5/1984 and that is where the miscarriage of justice has happened. 15. The charges or allegations as quoted above against the petitioner while not directly talk of imputation of forgery committed by the petitioner but indirectly pertain to the same incident and charges as would appear to be clearly for only minor irregularities like making a duplicate bill of the said FVC Bill No.73 for Rs.505.85 for payment of petty expenses of respondent office at the instructions of superior authority and not reporting the matter immediately to the officer etc. Even if it is assumed that the charges were proved against the petitioner in an inquiry held ex-parte, the punishment of compulsory retirement imposed upon him in the middle of his career was extremely unjustified and uncalled for. It was not an unblemished or unstigmatic discharge on compulsory retirement of dead wood employee but a punishment order & on which the Appellate Authority was bound to reconsider the entire matter in the perspective of acquittal order. 16. The concept of compulsory retirement is well settled & is used to remove the deadwoods after completion of qualifying service by the Govt. servant, if the competent authority of the Department is of the opinion that on the basis of material available on record, the Govt. servant in question is a liability and is a deadwood, which deserves to be removed from service. servant, if the competent authority of the Department is of the opinion that on the basis of material available on record, the Govt. servant in question is a liability and is a deadwood, which deserves to be removed from service. But, here is a case where the petitioner was tried for the offences based on same incident for which the charge sheet was also served upon him & criminal trial was also held and, therefore, in all fairness, the respondents ought to have waited for the criminal trial and in the face of exoneration on cogent grounds, the petitioner could very well be exonerated in the departmental inquiry also but that having not happened, nothing prevented the appellate authority from applying his mind on the reasons given in the acquittal order and set aside the order of compulsory retirement based on the charges of minor irregularities & negligence allegedly committed by the petitioner, because allegations of fraud and forgery was not even a charge framed by the Department against him and there is no evidence against the petitioner that he even facilitated such fraud or excess withdrawal of Rs.9000/- for the said FVC Bill. 17. The findings of the criminal court clearly show that figure 9 was added by somebody else in the Treasury Office, where the Bill was taken by peon Man Singh and after passing of the Bill, even money was paid to one Shri Rajendra Kumar Sharma and not the petitioner as was given in the statement of the Bank Official P.W.10 -Karan Singh examined by the Court. The Bank Official would have very well known the present petitioner, who was working as a Cashier cum UDC in the respondent Department and on several occasions was expected to go to the Bank for having transactions of the said respondent Department, therefore, said Bank Official would not have stated before the Court that the payment in question was not made to the petitioner but to some Rajendra Kumar Sharma. Therefore, in the absence of the any cogent material against the petitioner and in view of the complete exoneration and acquittal of the petitioner from the said offence, this Court is of the considered opinion that the punishment of compulsory retirement was absolutely harsh and uncalled for and the appellate authority miserably failed in appreciating the developments in judicial court in the case of the petitioner, even though the appellate authority passed the order on 1/7/1997, and the judgment of the criminal court acquitting the petitioner on 17/4/1996 was very much available and placed before him and referred in the impugned order dated 1/7/1997. Therefore, the said order reiterating the order of disciplinary authority in a parrot like manner shows total non-application of mind on the part of appellate authority. 18. The very purpose of providing for an effective remedy by way of appeal to the higher authority can be seen to have been clearly frustrated in the present case, when such non-application of mind is writ large. The holding of two proceedings in different fields does not mean that result of one proceeding cannot be looked into in other proceedings and the effect of one cannot be seen in another. The two proceedings even though allowed simultaneously, do not operate in a water tight compartments and the authorities while dealing with the disciplinary proceedings are expected to apply their mind to the fact situation and ground realities and they cannot altogether ignore the findings of competent court in criminal trial while dealing with the disciplinary proceedings against the Govt. servant on the same set of facts & material. 19. This Court finds that the present case is a glaring example of turning Nelson's Eye by the appellate authority to the detailed judgment of criminal court, which was definitely placed before him and contentions were also raised that on the basis of the same, the impugned order of compulsory retirement by way of punishment deserved to be quashed. Otherwise, the result would be that the petitioner even though honorably & fully exonerated by criminal court by a detailed judgment upon examination of so many witnesses, faces the stigmatic removal from service nonetheless. This is not permissible in law. 20. The brief discussion of case laws cited at the bar at this juncture is considered appropriate. (i) In Capt. M. Paul Anthony vs. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. & Anr. This is not permissible in law. 20. The brief discussion of case laws cited at the bar at this juncture is considered appropriate. (i) In Capt. M. Paul Anthony vs. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. & Anr. - (1999) 3 SCC 679 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that if the departmental proceedings and criminal case are based on similar set of facts, it is desirable to stay the departmental proceedings till the completion of criminal case and even while permitting that if the criminal case does not proceed or its disposal is being unduly delayed, the departmental proceedings, even if they were stayed on account of pendency of criminal case, can be resumed and proceeded with, so as to conclude them at the early date. The purpose is that if the employee is found not guilty, his honour may be vindicated and in case he is found guilty, administration may get rid of him at the earliest. The relevant extract from para 15 and 22 are quoted below for ready reference:- “There is a consensus of judicial opinion a basic principle that proceedings in a criminal case and the departmental proceedings can go on simultaneously, except where departmental proceedings and criminal case are based on same set of facts and the evidence on both the proceedings are common. Basis for this proposition is that proceedings in a criminal case and the departmental proceedings operate in distinct and different jurisdictional areas. In departmental proceedings, factors operating in the mind of the Disciplinary Authority may be many, such as enforcement of discipline, or to investigate the level of integrity of the delinquent or the other staff. The standard of proof required in those proceedings is also different from that required in a criminal case. While in departmental proceedings, the standard of proof is one of preponderance of the probabilities, in a criminal case, the charge has to be proved by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. The standard of proof required in those proceedings is also different from that required in a criminal case. While in departmental proceedings, the standard of proof is one of preponderance of the probabilities, in a criminal case, the charge has to be proved by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. Conclusions which are deducible from various decisions of the Supreme Court on this point are as follows: (i) Departmental proceed-ings and proceedings in a criminal case can proceed simultaneously as there is no bar in their being conducted simultaneously, though separately; (ii) If the departmental proceedings and the criminal case are based on identical and similar set of facts and the charge in the criminal case against the delinquent employee is of a grave nature which involves complicated questions of law and fact, it is desirable to stay the departmental proceedings till the conclusion of the criminal case; (iii) Whether the nature of a charge in a criminal case is grave and whether complicated questions of fact and law are involved in that case, will depend upon the nature of offence, the nature of the case launched against the employee on the basis of evidence and material collected against him during investigation or as reflected in the charge sheet; (iv) The factors mentioned at (ii) and (iii) above cannot be considered in isolation to stay the Departmental proceedings but due regard has to be given to the fact that the departmental proceedings cannot be unduly delayed; (v) If the criminal case does not proceed or its disposal is being unduly delayed, the departmental proceedings, even if they were stayed on account of the pendency of the criminal case, can be resumed and proceeded with, so as to conclude them at an early date, so that if the employee is found not guilty his honour may be vindicated and in case he is found guilty, administration may get rid of him at the earliest.” Thus, while permitting the two proceedings against the Govt. Servant simultaneously, the Hon'ble Apex Court has clearly laid down that interaction of the two proceedings cannot be avoided, therefore, it is desirable not to proceed in the departmental proceedings while the criminal trial is on against the Govt. servant, if the set of facts & evidence is common, which is the fact situation in the present case also. Servant simultaneously, the Hon'ble Apex Court has clearly laid down that interaction of the two proceedings cannot be avoided, therefore, it is desirable not to proceed in the departmental proceedings while the criminal trial is on against the Govt. servant, if the set of facts & evidence is common, which is the fact situation in the present case also. (ii) In a similar matter, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M.V.Bijlani vs. Union of India & ors. - (2006) 5 SCC 88 held that where the delinquent is charged with non-maintenance of procedural registers but was not charged for theft or misappropriation of 4000 kg of telegraph copper wire or misutlization thereof, even though charges were framed after receipt of a report of CBI, the court quashed the impugned order of the disciplinary authority and appellate authority based on inquiry report in the following terms: “14. From a perusal of the Enquiry Report, it appears to us that the disciplinary authorities proceeded on a wrong premise. The Appellant was principally charged for non-maintenance of ACE-8 Register. He was not charged for theft or misappropriation of 4000 kgs. of telegraph copper wire or misutilization thereof. If he was to be proceeded against for misutilisation or misappropriation of the said amount of copper wire, it was necessary for the disciplinary authority to frame appropriate charges in that behalf. Charges were said to have been framed after receipt of a report from CBI (Anti Corruption Bureau). It was, therefore, expected that definite charges of misutilization/ misappropriation of copper wire by the Appellant would have been framed. The Appellant, therefore, should have been charged for defalcation or misutilisation of the stores he had handled if he was to be departmentally proceeded against on that basis. The second charge shows that he had merely failed to supervise the working of the line. There was no charge that he failed to account for the copper wire over which he had physical control. 15. It will bear repetition to state that the charges which were framed related to only non-maintenance of ACE-8 Register and non-supervision of working of the line. In absence of any charge that he had in fact misappropriated copper wire for his own benefit out of the disposal thereof, the question as regard purported misconduct by way of misutilisation of 4000 kg. of copper wire could not have been gone into. In absence of any charge that he had in fact misappropriated copper wire for his own benefit out of the disposal thereof, the question as regard purported misconduct by way of misutilisation of 4000 kg. of copper wire could not have been gone into. Furthermore, it has not been shown that ACE-8 register was required to be maintained in an appropriate form or in a particular manner i.e. in bound form or in loose sheets. 25. It is true that the jurisdiction of the court in judicial review is limited. Disciplinary proceedings, however, being quasi-criminal in nature, there should be some evidences to prove the charge. Although the charges in a departmental proceedings are not required to be proved like a criminal trial, i.e., beyond all reasonable doubts, we cannot lose sight of the fact that the Enquiry Officer performs a quasi-judicial function, who upon analysing the documents must arrive at a conclusion that there had been a preponderance of probability to prove the charges on the basis of materials on record. While doing so, he cannot take into consideration any irrelevant fact. He cannot refuse to consider the relevant facts. He cannot shift the burden of proof. He cannot reject the relevant testimony of the witnesses only on the basis of surmises and conjectures. He cannot enquire into the allegations with which the delinquent officer had not been charged with. 26. The report of the Enquiry Officer suffers from the aforementioned vices. The orders of the disciplinary authority as also the appellate authority which are based on the said Enquiry Report, thus, cannot be sustained. We have also noticed the way in which the Tribunal has dealt with the matter. Upon its findings, the High Court also commented that it had not delved deep into the contentions raised by the Appellant. The Tribunal also, thus, failed to discharge its functions properly.” (iii) Reiterating the legal position in the case of Paul Anthony vs. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. & Anr, the Supreme Court in the case of G.M.Tank vs. State of Gujarat & Ors. - (2006) 5 SCC 446 held as under:- “In this case, the departmental proceedings and the criminal case are based on identical and similar set of facts and the charge in a Departmental case against the appellant and the charge before the Criminal Court are one and the same. This is a case of no evidence. - (2006) 5 SCC 446 held as under:- “In this case, the departmental proceedings and the criminal case are based on identical and similar set of facts and the charge in a Departmental case against the appellant and the charge before the Criminal Court are one and the same. This is a case of no evidence. There is no iota of evidence against the appellant to hold that the appellant is guilty of having illegally accumulated excess income by way of gratification. The Investigating Officer and other departmental witnesses were the only witnesses examined by the Enquiry Officer who by relying upon their statement came to the conclusion that the charges were established against the appellant. The same witnesses were examined in the criminal case and the criminal court on the examination came to the conclusion that the prosecution has not proved the guilt alleged against the appellant beyond any reasonable doubt and acquitted the appellant by his judicial pronouncement with the finding that the charge has not been proved. The judicial pronouncement was made after a regular trial and on hot contest. Under these circumstances, it would be unjust and unfair and rather oppressive to allow the findings recorded in the departmental proceedings to stand. Thus, as the facts and evidence in the departmental as well as criminal proceedings were the same without there being any iota of difference, the appellant should succeed. The distinction which is usually proved between the departmental and criminal proceedings on the basis of the approach and burden of proof would not be applicable in the instant case. Though finding recorded in the domestic enquiry was found to be valid by the Courts below, when there was an honourable acquittal of the employee during the pendency of the proceedings challenging the dismissal, the same requires to be taken note of and the decision in Paul Anthony's case, (1999) 3 SCC 679 will apply.” (iv) In State of Uttaranchal & Ors. vs. Kharak Singh – (2008) 8 SCC 236 , the Supreme Court held that inquiry should not be empty formality and observed as under:- “The following are some of the basic principles regarding conducting of departmental enquiries; (i) The enquiries must be conducted bona fide and care must be taken to see that the enquiries do not become empty formalities; (ii) If an officer is a witness to any of the incidents which is the subject matter of the enquiry or if the enquiry was initiated on a report of an officer, then in all fairness he should not be the Enquiry Officer. If the said position becomes known after the appointment of the Enquiry Officer, during the enquiry, steps should be taken to see that the task of holding an enquiry is assigned to some other officer; (iii) In an enquiry, the employer /department should take steps first to lead evidence against the workman/delinquent charged and give an opportunity to him to crossexamine the witnesses of the employer. Only thereafter, the workman/delinquent be asked whether he wants to lead any evidence and asked to give any explanation about the evidence led against him; (iv) On receipt of the enquiry report, before proceeding further, it is incumbent on the part of the disciplinary/punishing authority to supply a copy of the enquiry report and all connected materials relied on by the enquiry officer to enable him to offer his views, if any.” 21. One need not multiply the authorities with reference to case laws relied upon by the learned counsel for the respondents in the cases of; (i) 1982 RLR 635 – B.S. Singhvi vs. United Commercial Bank & Anr. (ii) AIR 1999 SC 1416 - Capt. M. Paul Anthony vs. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. & Anr. (iii) (2008) 1 SCC 650 - Indian Overseas Bank, Anna Salai and Anr. vs. P. Ganesan and Ors. (iv) (2004) 6 SCC 482 - Allahabad District Co-operative Bank Ltd., Allahabad vs. Vidhya Varidh Mishra (v) 2002 WLC (3) 62 – Arjun Singh Patel vs. State of Raj. & Ors. 22. M. Paul Anthony vs. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. & Anr. (iii) (2008) 1 SCC 650 - Indian Overseas Bank, Anna Salai and Anr. vs. P. Ganesan and Ors. (iv) (2004) 6 SCC 482 - Allahabad District Co-operative Bank Ltd., Allahabad vs. Vidhya Varidh Mishra (v) 2002 WLC (3) 62 – Arjun Singh Patel vs. State of Raj. & Ors. 22. This Court has also observed above that there is no dispute on the legal position as given in the case laws relied upon by the learned counsel for the respondents that two types of proceedings can be carried on simultaneously as their scope is different but there are hedges & constraints against this proposition, as discussed above. 23. Thus, this Court finds that the compulsory retirement order passed against the petitioner by way of punishment, who unfortunately died during the pendency of writ petition, is liable to be quashed and set aside. 24. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned compulsory retirement order dated 9/5/1984 and appellate order dated 1/7/1997 are quashed and set aside. The petitioner shall be treated as notionally reinstated back in service from the date of his suspension itself, which ultimately ended in his compulsory retirement on 9/5/1984, till the date of his superannuation, but however, no monetary benefits will be paid as he did not actually work during the said period. But, the legal representatives of the petitioner, however, will be entitled to the consequential pensionary benefits & other retiral dues computed after giving him the due notional benefits of pay fixation, selection scale, notional promotions etc. flowing to the petitioner on account of such quashing of these orders and the same may be paid to them within six months from today. No costs.