ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
State Of Rajasthan – Appellant
Versus
Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner against the impugned order dated 31.08.2004 passed by the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur (for short 'the Tribunal') by which the order of compulsory retirement of the respondent No.2 dated 21.09.2000 has been quashed and set aside.
2. Facts, in brief, of the case are that the respondent No.2 was appointed on the post of Patwari on 01.05.1974. After completion of 26 years of service, he was given compulsory retirement by the District Collector (Land Records) District Ajmer, vide order dated 21.09.2000 by exercising the powers conferred under Rule 53(i) of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 (for short 'the Rules of 1996'). The order dated 21.9.2000 is reproduced hereinbelow:-
'Whereas Shri Mool Chand Jadam son of Shri Tej Mal Jadam designation Inspector Land Record, Tehsil Masuda has completed 15 years of qualifying service.
Now, therefore, in exercise of the right conferred by rule 53(i) of Rajasthan Civil Service (Pension) Rules 1996, the Governor is hereby pleased to retire the said
Baikuntha Nath Das And Anr. Vs. Chief District Medical Officer and Anr.
Madan Mohan Choudhary v. State of Bihar reported in 1999 (1) JT 459
Pyare Mohan Lal Vs. State of Jharkhand and Ors.
R.L. Butail v. Union of India [(1970) 2 SCC 876]
Ram Murti Yadav Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr.
State of Gujarat and Ors. Vs. Suryakant Chunnilal Shah
State of Punjab Vs. Gurdas Singh reported in 1998 (4) SCC 92
State of U.P. and Anr. v. Bihari Lal
Union of India & Ors. v. Dulal Dutt
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.