Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:4550 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5020 of 2024 Petitioner :- Chandra Datt Bawari Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Forest Deptt. Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Alok Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rishabh Tripathi Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 and Shri Rishabh Tripathi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents No.2 to 5. 2. Under challenge is the office order dated 03.05.2023, a copy of which is annexure 1 to the petition, passed by the respondent No.3 as well as the charge sheet dated 28.06.2023, a copy of which is annexure 4 to the petition, issued by the department. 3. Vide order dated 03.05.2023, the Corporation has indicated that during the working of the petitioner from August, 2012 to November, 2014, there was an illegal felling of trees which amounted to Rs.15,00,000/- and odd against which he failed to collect a royalty of Rs.11,00,000/- and odd and the interest thereon of Rs.4,00,000/- (approximately) and he has also caused the loss of Rs.19,000/- and odd for which disciplinary proceeding has been initiated against him. 4. Admittedly, the petitioner retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.01.2020. 5. The power to take disciplinary action against a retired employee has only been incorporated vide amended Rule 39 of the Model Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules for Services of U.P. State Enterprises Regulations (hereinafter referred to as "the Regulations") w.e.f. 10.10.2022. This Court in the case of Nand Kishor Shukla vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others in Writ A No.1049 of 2024 decided today i.e. on 23.01.2025 has held that the amendment in Rule 39 of the Regulations shall only have prospective effect and would not govern the employees who retired prior to enforcement of the said amendment. 6. Considering the aforesaid judgment, it is apparent that the disciplinary proceedings which have been initiated against the petitioner subsequent to his retirement are patently beyond jurisdiction. 7. Keeping in view of the aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed. The office order dated 03.05.2023, a copy of which is annexure 1 to the petition, as well as the charge sheet dated 28.06.2023, a copy of which is annexure 4 to the petition, are quashed. 8. Consequences to follow. Order Date :- 23.1.2025 S. Shivhare Digitally signed by :- SHASHANK SHIVHARE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench