Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
HARPREET SINGH BRAR
Jaspal Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Harpreet Singh Brar, J. (Oral)
The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of order dated 04.10.2024 (Annexure P-5) issued by respondent No.2 whereby the retirement order dated 30.09.2024 (Annexure P-4) was withdrawn qua respondent No.4.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
2. Briefly, the facts are that the petitioner was promoted to the post of Additional Director with Punjab Energy Development Agency (hereinafter 'PEDA'). The next promotional designation is that of the Director for which only one post exists, as duly mentioned in Annexure A of the Punjab Energy Development Agency Service Rules, 2016 (hereinafter 'PEDA Rules'). The petitioner has three years of experience in regular service and outstanding/very good ACRs in the last four years. The erstwhile Director- respondent No.4 retired on 30.09.2024 as he attained the age of 58 years. However, his retirement order was illegally rescinded vide impugned order dated 04.10.2024 (Annexure P-5), in spite of the fact that the petitioner was eligible for the post of Director at the time of retirement of respondent No.4. Hence, the petitione
The legal principle established is the binding nature of government guidelines mandating a retirement age of 60 years for Central Public Sector Enterprises, overriding any contradictory internal regu....
Point of Law : A Government servant has no right to continue in service beyond the age of superannuation and if he is retained beyond that age it is only in the exercise of the discretion of the Gove....
Point of Law : Court quashing an administrative decision without substituting its own decision, and is to be contrasted with an appeal where the appellate tribunal substitutes its own decision on the....
Promotion cannot be void due to allegations against a foundational Government Order unless fraud is proven; equal treatment under the law is mandatory.
The court held that a Premature Retirement Scheme for unionized employees is illegal and violates principles of natural justice, as it only applies to officers and not workers under the Industrial Em....
Promotions must respect principles of natural justice, including the right to a hearing for affected parties before decisions are made.
The enhancement of retirement age is a policy decision of the government, not a right of employees, and cannot be mandated by the court.
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
