Back
Adityendra Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.
2. The petitioner has assailed the order dated 29.10.2018 passed by respondent no.2-Chief Election Officer, U.P., Lucknow by which he has been compulsory retired and the consequential order dated 30.10.2018 passed by respondent no.3-Additional District Magistrate (Administration)/Deputy District Election Officer, Bulandshahar intimating the order dated 29.10.2018.
3. Brief facts giving rise to the present case are that the petitioner was appointed as Junior Assistant on 19.06.1990 in the office of District Election Officer. The petitioner was promoted to the post of Senior Assistant. The petitioner was suspended by order dated 01.07.2011 on the charge that he had not been performing his duties properly and had not abide by the orders of his superiors. Thereafter, an enquiry was instituted against the petitioner. The petitioner was awarded punishment by placing him on the minimum pay scale by order dated 16.02.2016.
4. It appears that the Chief Secretary, Government of U.P., Luckno
Point of law : Order of compulsory retirement against the petitioner is based upon subjective satisfaction of the entire record of the petitioner more particularly the recent record of the petitioner....
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....
Compulsory retirement of judicial officers is based on overall performance and integrity, not merely on disciplinary findings, and is not considered a punishment.
The importance of approaching the court with clean hands and the employer's right to remove 'dead wood' employees.
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 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 main legal point established in the judgment is that the order of compulsory retirement is based on the subjective satisfaction of the government, and the court will not interfere with such order....
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
