https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303831 Departmental proceedings against a retired employee cannot be initiated beyond the period prescribed by the applicable pension and service rules. Here, the alleged misconduct was from 2002, the employee retired in 2004, and the charge-sheet was issued in 2008; the second proviso to Rule 2.2(B) of the Punjab Civil Service Rules required proceedings within four years and Government sanction, so the charge-sheet was quashed. In addition, where a public appeal is ex facie frivolous and imposes an unnecessary burden on judicial time, costs may be recovered personally from the officer who authorised the litigation to ensure accountability. The order directing personal recovery of costs was upheld. en-us Tue, 17 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 Aug 2022 18:52:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303831 Departmental proceedings against a retired employee cannot be initiated beyond the period prescribed by the applicable pension and service rules. Here, the alleged misconduct was from 2002, the employee retired in 2004, and the charge-sheet was issued in 2008; the second proviso to Rule 2.2(B) of the Punjab Civil Service Rules required proceedings within four years and Government sanction, so the charge-sheet was quashed. In addition, where a public appeal is ex facie frivolous and imposes an unnecessary burden on judicial time, costs may be recovered personally from the officer who authorised the litigation to ensure accountability. The order directing personal recovery of costs was upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 17 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303831