IMPORTANT POINTS
ACR written out of grouse is non-est in law.
If the competent authority arrives at a justifiable conclusion, on the basis of the record available in connection therewith, that itself would be sufficient to order the premature retirement of the concerned individual.

Judgment :

JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, J.

1. The petitioner was selected by the Jammu and Kashmir Public Service Commission for appointment to the Kashmir Civil Service (Judicial) on 5.1.1987. He joined as Munsif (-cum-Judicial Magistrate, First Class) at Basohli in District Kathua. He was thereafter promoted as a Subordinate Judge (-cum- Chief Judicial Magistrate) on 18.11.1996. And thereafter, as an adhoc District & Sessions Judge on 8.8.2002. While in the cadre of District & Sessions Judge, he was placed in the selection grade on 15.06.2011.

2. For the controversy in hand, some of the Annual Confidential Reports recorded in respect of work and conduct of the petitioner are important. A brief summary thereof is recorded hereunder:      

3. So far as the present controversy is concerned, it pertains to the compulsory retirement of the petitioner. Compulsory retirement is regulated under the provisions of Higher Judicial Service Rules, 2009 (issued vide SRO 339, dated 27.10.2009, Law Department). Rule 24 of the aforesaid rules pertains to the subject of premature retirement. The same is being extracted hereunder:

“24. Premature retirement

The High Court shall assess and evaluate the record of the members of the service for his/her continued utility before he/she attains the age of 50 years, 55 years and 58 years by following the procedure for compulsory retirement under the service rules applicable to him/her and if he/she is not found fit and eligible he/she will compulsorily retire on his/her attaining the age of 50 years, 55 years and 58 years, as the case may be.”

4. A perusal of the aforesaid rule reveals, that it is open to the High Court to evaluate the record of a judicial officer, before he attains the ages of 50, 55 and 58 years, for ordering his premature retirement. In evaluating the record of the concerned judicial officer, the High Court is to follow the procedure for compulsory retirement under the service rules applicable to him. In the event of a judicial officer being found unfit to continue in service, it is open to the High Court to prematurely retire him, on attaining the ages of 50,55 and 58 years.

5. In conjunction with the rule of premature retirement, it is also essential for us to refer to the criteria/norms for continuity in service after the ages of 50,55 and 58 years. The criteria/norms were adopted by a resolution of the Full Court of the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir on 3.6.2013. Some parts of the resolution are relevant for the present controversy, and are being extracted hereunder:

“While considering the cases of the Judicial Officers for their continued utility in service at 50, 55 and 58 years of age in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in All India Judges Association Vs. Union of India AIR 1993 SC 2493 and (2011) 10 SCC. I, the following criteria/norms shall be taken into account by the High Court in its administrative capacity.

A. Assessment Standards:

Following are the factors to be taken into consideration individually/collectively to assess the officer.

1. Over all past service record of the Officer shall be examined and considered with emphasis on the last 5 years' record to assess his potential for continued utility in the service beyond 50,55 and 58 years.

2. The quality of the judgments delivered by the officer, whether or not assailed before the High Court, in suits, appeals, Session cases, Revisions and other proceedings during the past ten years of his service tenure. The quality of judgments will