The entire service record, including adverse reports, must be examined before premature retirement. Adverse reports alone may not justify premature retirement.

KULDIP SINGH, J.

1. The present case has been received by remand on the orders, passed by a Division Bench of this Court on 14.9.2016, vide which the judgment dated 5.8.2015, passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court, dismissing the writ petition, was set aside and the case was ordered to be re-heard.

2. The petitioner, who was working as a Lecturer of English in Government College, Saffidon, District Jind, has filed the present writ petition, seeking quashing of the order dated 24.9.1998 (Annexure-P-3), vide which the Governor of Haryana prematurely retired him from service in public interest while exercising the powers under Rule 5.32-A(C) of the Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume-II, Part-I. The petitioner also seeks the quashing of adverse reports (Annexures-P-4 to P-9), which includes the order rejecting his representation. The date of birth of the petitioner is 16.2.1946. The petitioner, having obtained the Degree of Master of Arts in English subject, was appointed as a Lecturer in English in Brij Mandal College, Hodal, District Faridabad, on 1.8.1974. The said college was a privately managed Government Aided College. Later on, he was confirmed on the said post. On 16.2.1980, the said college was taken over by the Haryana Government and now it is known as a Government College, Hodal. As per the deed executed between the college authorities and the Government, the petitioner was absorbed in the Government service and his pay was protected and his service was also counted towards pension etc., but no seniority was allowed viz-a-viz the other Government employees of the department. According to the petitioner, he has got good, very good and excellent reports during his career, except for the years 1992-93 and 1993- 94, which were malafide spoiled by the then Principal (since retired) as he was biased against the petitioner. In the confidential report for the year 1992-93, against the column of integrity, certain adverse remarks were recorded, which were not regarding the integrity. The petitioner claims that in the year 1990-91 when he was posted as a Lecturer in English in Government College, Saffidon, he applied for a car loan. The Government sanctioned a loan of Rs. 70,000/- to the petitioner for the purchase of a car. The said loan was disbursed to him on 4.12.1991. The petitioner purchased a second hand (1988 model) Premier Padmini Car for Rs. 90,000/-. The required documents, namely, utilization certificate, cash receipt and the registration certificate of the said car were submitted to the Principal, Government College, Saffidon, in April, 1992. In August, 1992, the petitioner was transferred to the Government College, Narnaul, where he was informed that the copies of the required documents regarding purchase of car have not been submitted. The petitioner again submitted the copy of the said document and also informed the Principal that he had already done so while being posted in Government College, Saffidon. When the Principal of the Government College, Narnaul, enquired from the Principal of the Government College, Saffidon, he was told that the petitioner had not submitted the documents regarding purchase of new car, but of old car. The petitioner also submitted his request that the loan was sanctioned to him for purchase of an old car and not for a new car as the new car at the relevant time was priced around Rs. 2 lacs, whereas the Government sanctions 3/4th amount of the price of the car to be purchased. Since he was sanctioned an amount of Rs. 70,000/-, he had purchased an old car and submitted the requisite documents. On the insistence of the Principal that the documents of new car be submitted, the petitioner requested that he should be allowed to sell the said car and be also allowed to deposit the entire loan amount with interest. Accordingly, the order was passed by the respondent No. 2 wherein the entire amount was ordered to be deducted from the salary of the petitioner with 4% penal interest