SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 1009

G.T.NANAVATI, S.C.AGRAWAL
State Of Rajasthan – Appellant
Versus
Mangilal Pindwal – Respondent


JUDGMENT

S.C. Agrawal, J.-The question that falls for consideration in this appeal relates to the validity of the amendment introduced in Rule 244(2) of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules ) by notification dated March 11, 1976. Rule 244(2) makes provision for compulsory retirement of a Government servant.

2. The respondent was employed as an Upper Division Clerk with the Government of Rajasthan. After he had completed 25 years of qualifying service he was compulsorily retired by order of the Collector, Ajmer dated March 31, 1973 on payment of three months pay and allowances in lieu of notice. The said order was passed under sub-rule (2) of Rule 244 of the Rules. Along with the order of compulsory retirement a bank draft for a sum of Rs. 1,494/- representing three months pay and allowances was sent to the respondent. The respondent filed a writ petition in the Rajasthan High Court challenging the said order of compulsory retirement. The said writ petition was allowed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court by order dated January 17, 1978 on the ground that there was non-compliance with the provisions of sub-rule (2) of Rule 244 of the R


























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top