Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 1833 (RAJ)

Karim Khan v. State

2001-11-23

B.S.CHAUHAN

body2001
JUDGMENT 1. - The instant writ petition has been filed against the judgment and order dated 18.5.2000 by which the petitioner had been given compulsory retirement. 2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the petitioner was serving the respondents and he had been given compulsory retirement vide order dated 28.5.2000 (Annex. 1). It has been stated on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has been given compulsory retirement vide impugned order for not complying with the suggestions and adopting indifferent attitude. It had been suggested by the petitioner's counsel that this cannot be a ground for giving compulsory retirement. 3. On the contrary, the respondents have submitted that though no disciplinary enquiry had ever been held against the petitioner nor any punishment had been imposed nor his integrity had ever been doubtful but as he had been incompetent to discharge the official duties, he has rightly been given compulsory retirement under the provisions of Clause (1) of Rule 53 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996. 4. The said Rule provides that compulsory retirement may be given to an employee on account of his indolence or doubtful integrity or incompetence to discharge official duties or insufficiency in due performance of official duties. Undoubtedly, none of these had been shown by the respondent existing in case of the present petitioner nor it had been shown as how many times he has ignored the suggestions or he had taken indifferent attitude while working. Even if there was a sole incident, it cannot be a ground of compulsory retirement. No other grounds/material on the basis of which petitioner could be retired compulsorily had been pointed out to be in existence. 5. As the grounds taken by the respondents for giving the compulsory retirement to the petitioner do not fall within the ambit of the said Rules, the order is liable to be quashed. 6. The petition, therefore, succeeds and is allowed. The impugned order dated 18.5.2000 is hereby quashed. The petitioner shall be deemed to be in continuous service. However, in view of the special facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner shall be entitled to 50% of the back-wages. No order as to costs.Writ Petition Allowed - Compulsory Retirement Quashed. *******