Back
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
RANVIR SIGH CHAUHAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. employment history and promotions of petitioner detailed. (Para 1) |
| 2. challenging the government order on essential procedural grounds. (Para 2) |
JUDGMENT :
1. The petitioner states that he initially joined service as a Stenographer in the Revenue Department on 07.11.1992. He was promoted to Senior Personal Assistant on 22.03.2016, thereafter to Personal Officer on 11.09.2019, and subsequently to the post of Chief Personal Officer on 02.12.2020 in the office of the District Magistrate, Haridwar. It is pleaded that his Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) from 1992–93 to 2015–16 were all “Excellent”. The ACRs for the years 2016–17, 2017–18, and 2018–19 were not available with the District Magistrate as the petitioner was then posted in the Camp Office, Dehradun, office of District Magistrate, Dehradun and the office of District Magistrate, Uttarkashi. It is further submitted that no departmental inquiry was ever initiated or pending against him.
2. By means of present petition, petitioner has sought following reliefs:
(i) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari calling for record and quash G.O./Guidelines dated 20.02.2002 (Annexure 1) and the order dated 17.06.2021 (Anne
The court upheld the validity of the Government Order regarding compulsory retirement procedures, affirming that it does not violate natural justice and that the entire service record may be consider....
Court affirmed that compulsory retirement must follow procedural guidelines, with emphasis on subjective satisfaction of authorities based on the entire service record, highlighting narrow scope for ....
The decision of compulsory retirement is based on the subjective satisfaction of the employer, and the entire service record of the employee must be considered. The court's scope of judicial review i....
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. ....
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....
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....
Compulsory retirement of judicial officers is based on overall performance and integrity, not merely on disciplinary findings, and is not considered a punishment.
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
