IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
Ali Mohammad Magrey, Puneet Gupta, JJ.
State of J&K and Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Reyaz Anwar Masoodi - Respondent
LPA 166/2018
Decided On : 27-04-2022
Service Law-Compulsory Retirement-Article 226(2) of CSRs authorises Government to retire a Government employee, if it is of opinion that it is in public interest to do so, at any time after he has completed 22 years/44 completed six monthly periods of qualifying service or 48 years of age, in manner prescribed therein-Opinion of Government has to be driven by nothing other than public interest-First and foremost is APR folder of Government employee with particular reference to entries in APRs for last five years-It is wholly responsibility of Secretaries to Government to ensure that APRs of officers are initiated, reviewed and accepted and to monitor it from time to time-Responsibility of custody and maintenance thereof lies with Accepting Authorities-Challan has not yet been produced before court of competent jurisdiction in any of two FIRs-Committee has not screened APRs of respondent, which constitute the most important and substantial record of service of a Government employee-Committee has also not taken into account fact that there was no such material as specified in OM which could adversely reflect upon reputation in public of respondent and on the basis of which Committee could have opined that he did not enjoy a good reputation in public. (Paras 17, 18, 20, 22 and 23)
Result-LPA dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Ali Mohammad Magrey, J.
This Letters Patent Appeal by the State of J&K (Now Union Territory) has been filed against the judgment and order dated 23.03.2018 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court whereby the respondent’s writ petition, SWP no.1453/2015, challenging his compulsory retirement order from Government service, issued by the appellants, has been allowed quashing the order impugned therein with direction to the appellants to reinstate the respondent-writ petitioner and grant him all consequential benefits within the period specified therein.
2. We heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the matter.
3. The respondent (writ petitioner) was initially appointed as Range Officer Grade-I on ad hoc basis vide Government order no.303-FST of 1995 dated 12.10.1995. Later, he was substantively appointed on the post vide Government order no.227-FST dated 24.05.2004 and was continued at North Jehlum Range, Baramulla. Thereafter, vide Forest Order no.236 of 2004 dated 19.07.2004, he was transferred and posted at Forest Range, Rajwar, Handwara. From there he was transferred and posted at Rafiabad Range, Watergam of Langate Forest Division. While being posted there, he was deputed for undergoing training at State Forest Service College, Bunihat, Assam. After return from the training course, he was posted at Magam Range, Forest Division, Langate. Thereafter, he was transferred and placed at the disposal of Managing Director, J&K State Forest Corporation for his posting against the post of Divisional Manager/equivalent.
4. It appears that, meanwhile, on 17.07.2007, an FIR, bearing no.42 of 2007 under Sections 5(1)(d) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 2006 read with Sections 467, 471 and 120(B) RPC was registered at Police Station Vigilance Organization, Kashmir (VOK). A questionnaire was served on the respondent, stating that during the investigation of the said case certain allegations mentioned therein had been prima facie established against him. It was, inter alia, alleged that while the respondent was posted as Range Officer, Forest Range Rajwar, Handwara, from 08/2004 to 12/2004, he had hatched a criminal conspiracy with one Mushtaq Ahmad Sofi, attorney holder of a private timber sale depot / joinery mill, namely, M/s 03-Star Enterprises, situated at Kachwari, Handwara; its Manager, Ghulam Hassan Bhat; Gh. Mohi-ud-Din Bhat, (Forester), the then B.O., Town Handwara, and others, as a result of which the respondent in connivance with others had manipulated the stock registers (Form 12 Register and Form 18-19 Register) pertaining to the stocks of M/s 03-Star Enterprises by way of changing the actual stock registers, being maintained at the said joinery mill / timber sale depot. The respondent was alleged to have thereby accommodated the detailed illicit timber in the records of the joinery mill / depot by inflating stock entries. The respondent was informed that by adopting corrupt practices he as a public servant had abused his official position in order to confer illegal advantage / benefit on the proprietor / attorney holder of the mill depot and others. The respondent was asked to submit his explanation in respect of the allegations mentioned in the said questionnaire. He is stated to have replied the questionnaire.
5. Thereafter, the Government issued order no.22-GAD(Vig) of 2014 dated 08.08.2014 according sanction to the prosecution of the petitioner and another person, viz the then B.O. of Town Handwara for commission of the offences under Sections 5(1)(d), 5(2) of J&K PC Act read with Sections 467, 471, 201, 120 B RPC and Section 6(e) of J&K Forest Act, 1987 in case FIR No.42/2007 of P/S VOK. The respondent challenged the aforesaid sanction order dated 08.08.2014 through OWP no.1403/2014 and the Court by order dated 01.09.2014 ordered that if challan with respect to the said FIR was filed before the competent court of jurisdiction, the proceedings shall remain under eclipse till next
Swaran Singh Chand v. Punjab State Electricity Board
State of Gujarat v. Umedbhai M. Patel
State of Gujarat v. Suryakant Chunilal Shah
State of J&K v. Farid Ahmad Tak
State of Orissa v. Ram Chandra Das
Balkuntha Nath Das v. Chief District Medical Officer
Compulsory retirement of a government employee must be based on a comprehensive evaluation of their entire service record and cannot rely solely on the existence of an FIR.
Compulsory retirement invalid without full service record review; pending FIR involvement alone, absent adverse entries or conviction, cannot justify order, rendering it punitive rather than public i....
Compulsory retirement invalid without cogent material from service record proving doubtful integrity; mere FIR involvement despite acquittals and clean APRs cannot justify order, which must consider ....
An order of compulsory retirement must be based on a thorough assessment of the entire service record of the employee, and if it casts a stigma or is based solely on disciplinary actions without cons....
The order of compulsory retirement of a judicial officer under Rule 53(1) of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996, is not arbitrary, unreasonable, discriminatory, or mala fide if it is ....
Point of Law : Dispensation of justice is not only an onerous duty but has been considered as akin to discharge of a pious duty, and therefore, is a very serious matter. The standards of probity, con....
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.