Back
S. M. SUBRAMANIAM, K. RAJASEKAR
G. Kalavathi – Appellant
Versus
Chief Secretary to Government, Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S.M. Subramaniam, J.
(Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to impugned orders passed by the 1st respondent in G.O.MS.No.474 Public (Special.A) Department dated 23.09.2020 and the consequential order passed by the 2nd respondent in notification No.113 of 2020 and the O.M in R.O.C.No.4021/2019/b1/Spl.Cell dated 29.09.2020 and to quash the same and consequentially direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service as District Judge with all consequential and other attendant benefits.)
1. The list on hand has been instituted challenging the order of Compulsory retirement in public interest, issued by the first respondent in G.O.Ms.No.474 Public (Special.A) Department dated 23.09.2020 and the consequential order passed by the 2nd respondent in notification No.113 of 2020 dated 29.09.2020. Further direction is sought for to reinstate the petitioner with all consequential and attendant service benefits.
Petitioner's Case:
2. The petitioner was appointed as Civil Judge (Junior Division) on 02.03.1998. She was promoted as Sub-Judge (Civil Judg
The decision to compulsorily retire a judicial officer should be based on the entire service records, including adverse entries, and the subjective satisfaction of the authority concerned. The court ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that adverse entries regarding integrity do not lose their significance and a single adverse entry is sufficient to warrant compulsory retirement i....
The decision to compulsorily retire a judicial officer in public interest is based on the entire service records, especially adverse entries relating to integrity, and requires circumspection in judi....
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 ....
Compulsory retirement of a judicial officer is justified based on subjective satisfaction regarding integrity, even with adverse entries, and judicial review is limited to the decision-making process....
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....
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
