SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(MP) 1019

A.K.GOHIL, A.K.PATNAIK
State of M. P. – Appellant
Versus
Ram Sewak Jaiswal – Respondent


Advocates:
Brijesh Sharma, Government Advocate for State-petitioners; S.P. Shrivastava for respondent No.1.

ORDER

Patnaik, CJ. -- 1. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution has been filed by the petitioners against the order dated 19.10.2001 passed by the Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Gwalior Bench in OA No. 218/1996.

2. The facts briefly are that the respondent No.2 was working as Asstt. Statistical Officer in the State of Madhya Pradesh and he was prematurely retired under rule 42 (1) (b) of the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 by order dated 3.8.1995. The Respondent No.1 challenged the said order dated 3.8.1995 of compulsory retirement before the Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Gwalior Bench in OA No. 218/1996. The Tribunal found from the records of the Screening Committee that the Screening Committee has considered the CRs of respondent No. 1 only for the period 1990-1994. The Tribunal held that as per the law laid down by the Supreme Court the entire service record of the Government servant had to be seen by the Screening Committee and since only five years' CRs of the respondent No.1 were considered by the Screening Committee, the order of compulsory retirement was liable to be quashed. Accordingly, the Tribunal quashed












Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top