(1.) The appellant who was working as a Works Manager, Karnal Depot. Haryana Roadways was retired compulsorily by an order dated May 14, 1976. He filed a review petition to the Government of Haryana to challenge the order of compulsory retirement. That review petition was disposed of by the State Government on July 9, 1979. The appellant filed a writ petition in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana on October 23, 1979 to challenge the order of compulsory retirement and the refusal of the State Government to review that order. The writ petition was dismissed by the High Court on the ground mainly that though the order of compulsory retirement was passed in May, 1976 the appellant merely resorted to a tenuous claim for reviewing that order instead of challenging that order on merits in a Court of law. Being aggrieved by the order of the High Court the appellant has filed this appeal by special leave.
(2.) We are unable to accept the view of the High Court that in seeking a review of the order by which he was retired compulsorily the appellant adopted a tenuous remedy. It is clear from the very order dated July 9, 1979 passed by the Secretary, Haryana Government Transport Department that a Review Board is constituted by the State of Haryana for reviewing orders of compulsory retirement. That order says that the case of the appellant was put up before the "Review Board" but the Board did not feel the necessity of changing the decision which was already taken by the Government. In these circumstances it cannot be said that the appellant had resorted to a tenuous remedy for the vindication of his rights.
(3.) As stated above the review order is dated July 9, 1979 while the writ petition was filed by the appellant in October 1979. Obviously the writ petition could not have been dismissed on the ground that it suffered from laches.