JUDGMENT AND ORDER : 1. Heard Mr. M.I. Hussain, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M. Bhattacharya, the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam, for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 as well as Ms. R. Akhtar, the learned counsel for the Accountant General’s Office, for the respondent No.4. 2. By this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the show-cause notice dated 30.01.2012 (Annexure-24) which was issued under Rule 9 of Assam Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964 read with Article 311 of the Constitution of India, under which the charges of alleged misappropriation of Government money while the petitioner was functioning as cashier between the year 1987-91 has been made against him. The petitioner has also challenged the communication dated 09.01.2012 (Annexure-25), whereby, the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Cultural Affairs Department, Dispur, had instructed the Director of the same Department to conduct and complete the inquiry against the writ petitioner. 3. Mr. M.I. Hussain, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that since the writ petitioner retired from service on 31.12.2008, no Departmental proceeding can be drawn up against him or any retired Government servant unless the requirement of Rule 21 (b)(i) and (ii) of the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969 are satisfied. In the instant case, the alleged misconduct relates to the year 1987-91 and the respondents without fulfilling the provisions of law as provided under the Pension Rules cannot initiate such Departmental proceeding against the writ petitioner. He also submits that in fact no proceeding has taken place pursuant to the impugned show-cause notice dated 30.01.2012 and 09.01.2012 but at the same time, the respondents have denied the petitioner from his due pensionary benefits including death-cum-retirement gratuity (DCRG). The petitioner, therefore, being aggrieved has approached this Court by filing the instant writ petition. 4. This Court on 03.04.2012 while issuing notice had granted an interim order in favour of the writ petitioner to the effect that the petitioner shall be paid provisional pension as per the relevant pension Rules till disposal of the writ petition. The petitioner, therefore, being aggrieved has approached this Court by filing the instant writ petition. 4. This Court on 03.04.2012 while issuing notice had granted an interim order in favour of the writ petitioner to the effect that the petitioner shall be paid provisional pension as per the relevant pension Rules till disposal of the writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since then he has been receiving his provisional pension, but, however, as no proceeding has been initiated pursuant to the show-cause notice dated 30.01.2012 and 09.01.2012, the respondents should be directed by this Court to regularise the provisional pension of the petitioner, after the show-cause notice dated 30.10.2012 and communication dated 09.01.2012 are interfered with. In this connection the learned counsel for the petitioner produced a communication dated 11.08.2009 written by Director of Cultural Affairs to the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Cultural Affairs Department, that as no departmental proceeding was drawn against the writ petitioner and that since he has retired from service, necessary permission may be accorded so as to give all the pensionary benefits to the writ petitioner. 5. Against the aforesaid communication dated 11.08.2009, Ms. M. Bhattacharya, the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam, was asked to obtain instructions and today on instructions she submits that no proceeding is pending against the writ petitioner. 6. Rule 21 (b) (i) and (ii) of the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969 provides that no Departmental proceedings if not instituted while the Officer was in service whether before his retirement or his re-employment shall be instituted except with the sanction of the Government of Assam and shall not be in respect of any event that took place 4 years before such institution. In the instant case admittedly the petitioner retired from service on 31.12.2008 and thereafter, the show-cause notice contemplating drawal of the Departmental proceeding was issued on him on 30.01.2012 to certain allegation alleged to have been committed between years 1987-91. It is also not in dispute that no prior sanction of the Governor of the State was obtained before drawing such departmental proceedings. 7. In view of above, I find merit in the writ petition and the petitioner should be given his pension and other benefits including DCRG. The show-cause notice dated 30.01.2012 (Anenxure-24) and the communication dated 09.01.2012 (Annexure-25) are therefore set aside and quashed. 7. In view of above, I find merit in the writ petition and the petitioner should be given his pension and other benefits including DCRG. The show-cause notice dated 30.01.2012 (Anenxure-24) and the communication dated 09.01.2012 (Annexure-25) are therefore set aside and quashed. The petitioner was given provisional pension in terms of the direction passed by this Court on 03.04.2012 and the petitioner has been receiving his pension since then. Therefore, upon coming to a finding that the writ petitioner be given his pension dues, the interim order dated 03.04.2012 is made absolute. It is made clear that the respondent authority shall release all the pensionary benefits of the petitioner as per the relevant Rules. 8. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No cost.