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

2002 Supreme(SC) 355

2002(2) Supreme 409
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Allahabad High Court)
V.N. Khare and Ashok Bhan, JJ.
State of U.P. & Ors. -Appellants
versus
Vijay Kumar Jain -Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 2083 of 2002
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 8738/2001)
With
C.A. No. 2085/2002 (@ SLP (C) No. 8975/2001)
Decided on 14-3-2002
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellants : Pramod Swarup, Parveen Swarup and Prashant Choudhary, Advocates.
For the Respondents : K.V. Vishwanthan, Atul Kumar Sinha, Advocate for Ajit Mohan Singh, B. Raghunath, Advocate for K.V. Venkataraman, Advocates.

IMPORTANT POINT
Entire service record or confidential report with emphasis on the later entries in the character roll can be taken into account by the government while considering a case for compulsory retirement of a government servant.

Headnote:Service Law-Compulsory Retirement-Entire service record or confidential report with emphasis on later entries in character roll can be taken into account-Integrity of respondent, Executive Engineer withheld by an order dated 13-6-1997-Entry in character roll of respondent was within ten years of passing of order of compulsory retirement-U.P. Services Tribunal shifted the entry from 1997-98 to 1983-84-Entry going beyond ten years of passing of order of compulsory retirement-Whether such an entry could be taken into account while considering case of respondent?- (Yes) -No infirmity in order compulsorily retiring respondent from service-Fundamental Rule 56(c). (Paras 15 & 16)

       

JUDGMENT

V. N. Khare, J.-Leave granted.

2. The respondent herein was, on 18.10.1972, initially appointed as an Assistant Engineer in an ad-hoc capacity in U.P. Rural Engineering Services. Subsequently, in the year 1979, the respondent s services were regularised and he was also confirmed on the post of Assistant Engineer. The respondent was promoted to the post of Executive Engineer w.e.f. 23.11.1980 by a Government Order on the basis of seniority-cum-merit. A Screening Committee set up by the U.P. Govt. after considering the respondent s service record and entries available in the character roll recommended that he should be retired compulsorily. Under Government Order, the Screening Committee or the State Government while considering a case of compulsory retirement, is required to take into account the service record and entries in the character roll for last ten years prior to the order of compulsory retirement. The government accepted the said recommendation of the Screening Committee and passed an order dated 22.2.1999 compulsorily retiring the respondent from service. The Screening Committee while recommending the compulsory retirement of the respondent and the State government while accepting the said recommendation took into consideration four adverse materials found in the character roll of the respondent, which are as under :

(1) The order dated 8.2.94 whereby the government directed for recovery of a sum of Rs. 79,994/- from the salary of the respondent and also stoppage of increment in the pay scale of Executive Engineer and awarding censure entry in his character roll for the year 1993-94.

(2) The order dated 16.10.86 whereby an warning was given to the respondent for his conduct in exercise of his duties.

(3) An order dated 20.3.83 whereby another censure entry was ordered to be recorded in the character roll of the respondent.

(4) An order dated 13.6.97 whereby the integrity of the respondent was not certified for committing serious irregularities in the work at Lucknow in the year 1983-84. By the said order the respondent was also awarded a censure entry for the year 1997-98.

3. The respondent herein filed a writ petition before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad challenging the order dated 22.2.1999 compulsorily retiring him from service. The respondent also filed a second writ petition before the High Court challenging the order dated 8.2.1994 whereby the government directed for recovery of Rs. 74,994/- from the salary of the respondent and also for ordering stoppage of increment in the pay scale of Executive Engineer and awarding of censure entry in his character roll in the year 1993-94. The respondent also filed a claim petition before the U.P. Services Tribunal, challenging the order dated 13.6.1997 whereby the State Government declined to certify his integrity. While the aforesaid writ petitions were pending, the U.P. Services Tribunal disposed of the said claim petition by ordering that the entry in respect of withholding of integrity for the year 1997-98 awarded by an order dated 13.6.1997 since related to the period 1983-84, said entry is shifted to the year 1983-84.

4. The High Court first took up the writ petition which was directed against the order dated 8.2.1994 and set aside the order impugned in the writ petition on the ground that the respondent was not responsible for any loss caused to the government in the purchase of the materials for the department. After setting aside the order dated 8.2.1994, the High Court took up the writ petition which related to compulsory retirement of the respondent from service. The High Court was of the view that so far as the recovery of money, stoppage of increment and censure entry for the year 1993-94 are concerned, the same having been set aside in connected writ petition, the said adverse materials are rendered non-existent and the same could not have formed basis of passing of the o






























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 Back to top