Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Sujit Narayan Prasad, Arun Kumar Rai
Md. Mobin Alam, son of SK. Qurban Ali – Appellant
Versus
Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Labour and Employment, Shram Shakti Bhawan, Rafi Marg, PO/PS New Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
Prayer
1. The instant review petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking review of the order dated 25.04.2024 passed in W.P.(S) No.2265 of 2023.
2. It needs to refer herein that the judgment passed by this Court in W.P.(S) No.2265 of 2023 has been carried to the Hon’ble Apex Court by filing Special Leave to Appeal being S.L.P. (C) Diary No.42077 of 2024. The same, however, was permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to approach the High Court seeking review. Accordingly, the said Special Leave to Appeal was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file review, for ready reference, the order passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court needs to be referred, as under:-
“1) Learned senior counsel for the petitioner prays for withdrawal of this special leave petition with liberty to approach the High Court seeking review.
2) As prayed, the special leave petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty.”
3. The present review therefore has been filed in pursuant to the aforesaid liberty.
Facts
4. The brief facts of the case, as per the pleading made in the writ petition which also carried in the instant review petition, needs to be referr
Review jurisdiction is limited to errors apparent on the record and cannot be used to reargue previously decided issues.
Court affirmed that compulsory retirement must follow procedural guidelines, with emphasis on subjective satisfaction of authorities based on the entire service record, highlighting narrow scope for ....
Premature retirement must comply with jurisdictional authority and assessment procedures as per CCS Rules; failure to follow statutory guidelines renders such actions void.
Compulsory retirement under Rule 56(J) is permissible when it serves public interest and follows due administrative process; it is not a punitive measure.
Point of Law : Rule 56(j) of Fundamental Rules is an extension of “Doctrine of Pleasure”, If the employer - Union of India is of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served by continuing an emp....
Compulsory retirement under Rule 56(j) is permissible based on an assessment of the employee’s service record and public interest; it is not a punitive measure and does not attract the provisions of ....
The judgment establishes the legal principle that the decision to compulsorily retire a Judicial Officer must be based on a comprehensive assessment of the entire service record, with limited scope f....
The court upheld the validity of the Government Order regarding compulsory retirement procedures, affirming that it does not violate natural justice and that the entire service record may be consider....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
