MATHURA PRASAD Vs. JAIL SUPERINTENDENT MORADABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) R. B. Misra, J. Heard Sri V. S. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri M. C. Chaturvedi, Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the State.

(2.) IN this writ petition the order dated 26-2-1996 (Annexure-2) has been challenged whereby the petitioner has been compulsorily retired from service under Rule 56 Part (c) of Fundamental Rule in the public interest by order of simplicitor.

(3.) ACCORDING to the petitioner the conclusion of the screening committee is not based on any material, therefore, the Court is to interfere in the impugned order dated 26-2-1996 of compulsory retirement and the according to the petitioner the compulsory retirement should not be passed by way of punitive measure in the light of 2001 (2) AWC 1445 (SC), M. P. Electricity Board v. Shree Baboo. In the case of Shree Baboo there was no material at all in the service record for compulsory retirement, whereas, in the present case as contended by the respondents large number of adverse remarks are available and different suggestive warnings are also available in the service record of petitioner which was indicated to improve and reform the functioning of the petitioner. The fundamental rules provides for compulsory retirement are in the interest of public service and in the present case retiring the petitioner in public interest is not illegal in view of Union of India v. J. N. Sinha, AIR 1971 SC 40; (1971) 1 SCR 791.