R A KHEMANI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this Intra-Court appeal preferred by the appellant questioning the validity of the order dated 28 th February, 2006 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.11/1987 preferred by the appellant under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, a short but neat question of law arises for consideration which touches upon the interpretation that has to be given to Fundamental Rule 56 (j)(i) as adopted by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA). Before we re-capitulate the said provision and the issue which arises on the interpretation thereof, it would be necessary to re-capitulate some important facts of this case.

(2.) The appellant herein had initially joined the services of Central Public Works Department (CPWD) on 24 th April, 1958 in CES Class-I after selection by Union Public Service Commission (UPSC). He got promotion as Executive Engineer and thereafter as Superintending Engineer. Sometime in the year 1976 he came on deputation with the respondent DDA as Superintending Engineer and while on deputation he was promoted as Addl. Chief Engineer and then as Chief Engineer in the year 1976 & 1977 respectively. In 1978 he was repatriated to CPWD. In the year 1980 he was again posted in DDA and while he was working with DDA he was promoted as Chief Engineer in the scale of 2250-2500 in CPWD. At that time his age was 49 years and 9 months. The case of the appellant for absorption in the respondent DDA was considered by the respondent DDA and a decision was taken to absorb him. He was accordingly absorbed in the respondent DDA on 26 th March, 1984 as Chief Engineer. At that time his age was 50 years and 2 months 11 days.

(3.) The respondent DDA invoked the provisions of FR 56 (j)(i) and passed an order of compulsory retirement of the appellant?s service on 23 rd December, 1985. The said FR 56 (j)(i) reads as under:-