UNION OF INDIA Vs. JAI BHAGWAN SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal filed under S.5 of the Kerala High Court Act, 1959 (in short, the Act) order of learned Single Judge holding, inter alia, that order directing compulsory retirement of respondent (hereinafter referred to as 'employee') was a camouflage for punishment relating to misconduct, is under challenge.

(2.) BACKGROUND facts are as follows: Employee was working as Sub Inspector of Central Industrial Security Force (in short, C.I.S.F.) at Palghat. Group Commandant of C.I.S.F. in purported exercise of power under Clause (j) of R.56 of Fundamental Rules (hereinafter referred to as 'Rules'), directed, by order dated 28th September 1993, retirement of employee from service in public interest. Said action was purportedly taken on the basis of a report submitted by review committee, which had considered employee's continuance in service not desirable on the basis of imposed punishments. Employee challenged the order in O. P. No. 13773 of 1993 on the ground that his compulsory retirement was directed with the object of punishing him for the past misconduct. It was submitted that retirement as directed was really dismissal or removal from service in disguise of an order of compulsory retirement by making it innocuous, and the Court can lift the veil to find out whether it is in reality a punishment.

(3.) STAND of appellant (hereinafter referred to as 'employer') is to the effect that employee had lacked responsibility towards the organisation and review committee did not find him suitable for continuance in service beyond the age of 55 years. Scope of judicial review in matters of compulsory retirement, it is submitted, was completely lost sight of by learned Single Judge. His order is based on surmises and conjectures. Learned counsel for employee, on the other hand, submitted that there was no material to show that employee's integrity was doubtful or that he was found to be ineffective. With reference to rules relating to premature retirement, as contained in Chapter IX, it is submitted that rules relating to premature retirement should not be used to retire a Government servant arbitrarily.