Back
PRAKASH PADIA
Ratan Kumar Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Prakash Padia, J.
1. Heard Sri Kripa Shankar Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Saurabh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vijay Shankar Prasad, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for respondents.
2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, with a prayer to quash the order dated 7.11.2019 passed by the State Government, compulsory retiring the petitioner and also quash the order dated 22.10.2019, by which the petitioner was awarded major penalty, i.e., stoppage of two increments for 5 years with temporary effect and one minor penalty of censure in terms of Rules 3 of Uttar Pradesh Government Servant (Disciplinary & Appeal), Rules, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as "Rules of 1999"). The petitioner has further challenged the order dated 20.9.2018 passed by the Director General of Police, by which the penalty of censure has been imposed upon the petitioner under Rule 3 of aforesaid Rules of 1999 as well as appellate order dated 1.5.2019.
3. The facts as stated by the petitioner in the writ petition are that the petitioner was directly recruited in the year 1998 on the post of Sub-Inspector of Police. During the course of duty i
Point of Law : Dispensation of justice is not only an onerous duty but has been considered as akin to discharge of a pious duty, and therefore, is a very serious matter. The standards of probity, con....
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 ....
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....
The decision to compulsorily retire a government servant under FR 56(j) must be made in public interest, and judicial scrutiny is limited to cases of mala fide exercise of power or lack of evidence. ....
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
