JUDGMENT : The matter comes up on Second Stay Application, however, both the counsels agree that the writ petition itself may be decided at this stage. 2. Heard both the learned counsels. The petitioner by way of this writ petition has assailed order dated 30.09.2013 by which the Board of respondent-Bank vide its decision dated 13.08.2013, approved by the Joint Registrar (Banking), Cooperative Societies, Jaipur on 27.09.2013 proceeded to compulsorily retire the petitioner on the ground that he was suffering from heart disease and would not be able to perform his duties with full vigor. The petitioner was compulsorily retired with effect from 30.09.2013. 3. It is case of the petitioner that he had suffered heard attack and undergone surgery and thereafter he was declared fit to join duty on 23.01.2013 and since then the petitioner was performing his duties to the best of his abilities. It is further his case that the Bank itself had started taking other ministerial work from the petitioner and there was no occasion to have compulsorily retire him when he was due for attaining superannuation in 2016 itself. 4. This Court vide order dated 24.10.2103 stayed the effect and operation of the order dated 30.09.2013. In consequence thereof, the petitioner continued to perform his duties as Driver and was also getting salary for the said post. He attained superannuation on 30.11.2016. However, the Bank issued an order on 28.11.2016 declaring that while the petitioner has attained superannuation with effect from 2016, his retiral benefits shall only be released subject to decision in the writ petition. The petitioner has, therefore, filed Second Stay Application. In the circumstances, the present petition is being heard finally. 5. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has also stated that for last 22 days, the petitioner was also not paid his salary before he attained superannuation. 6. A look at the decision dated 13.08.2013 and order dated 30.09.2013 show that the petitioner has been retired only on account of his having suffered heart ailment. There is no provision to compulsorily retire a person on the basis of suffering from some disease under the Rajasthan Service Rules. On the other hand, if a person has to be forcibly retired, there is a provision for granting invalidity pension apart from regular pension. 7. There is no provision to compulsorily retire a person on the basis of suffering from some disease under the Rajasthan Service Rules. On the other hand, if a person has to be forcibly retired, there is a provision for granting invalidity pension apart from regular pension. 7. In this regard, section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995 {herein after ‘the Act of 1995’} deserves to be noted, which reads as follows:- “47. (1) No establishment shall dispense with or reduce in rank, an employee who acquires a disability during his service. Provided that, if an employee, after acquiring disability is not suitable for the post he was holding, could be shifted to some other post with the same pay scale and service benefits. Provided further that if it is not possible to adjust the employee against any post, he may be kept on a supernumerary post until a suitable post is available or he attains the age of superannuation, whichever is earlier. (2) No promotion shall be denied to a person merely on the ground of his disability: Provided that the appropriate Government may, having regard to the type of work carried on in any establishment, by notification and subject to such conditions, if any, as may be specified in such notification, exempt any establishment from the provisions of this section.” 8. In view thereof, the heart ailment which even can not be said to be a ‘disability’ within the meaning of Act of 1995 could not be a reason to compulsorily retire the petitioner and the order therefore can not be allowed to be sustained. The course adopted by the respondents was clearly illegal and the decision dated 13.08.2013 and order dated 30.09.2013 are liable to be set aside. 9. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed. The decision dated 13.08.2013 as well as order dated 30.09.2013 passed by respondent-Bank against petitioner are quashed and set aside, with all consequential benefits. The respondents shall release the pension and retiral benefits as well as unpaid salary to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order. It goes without saying that if the order is not complied with, the petitioner shall be free to initiate contempt proceedings without further notice. The Second Stay Application also stands disposed of accordingly.