LAWS(ALL)-2003-9-29

SURENDRA PRASAD MISRA Vs. ENGINEERINCHIEF IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT

Decided On September 16, 2003
SURENDRA PRASAD MISRA Appellant
V/S
ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri U.S. Mishra learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri Raj Kumar learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

(2.) The listing application is disposed of and the writ petition is being heard right now with the consent of the parties under the Second Proviso to Rule 2 of Chapter XXII of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952.

(3.) According to the petitioner, lie was diploma-holder in Mechanical Engineering and was appointed on 20.8.1964 as a Junior Engineer in the Irrigation department and while working as a Junior Engineer the petitioner was compulsory retired on 5.5.1993. According to the petitioner his work and performance was satisfactory and he has received letter of appreciation during the service and to be best of his knowledge he was never awarded or communicated any adverse entries, therefore, there was no question in making any representation in respect of adverse entry, if any. The petitioner was compulsorily retired without looking into the records of the case and appreciation awarded to the petitioner without up-holding opportunity of hearing in derogation to the provisions of Article 311 of the Constitution and Article 14 as well as Article 21 and without observing the norms of principles of natural justice that too by way of punishment. According to the petitioner many of the Junior Engineer have been ignored whose performance was inferior to the petitioner and without affording and providing any opportunity of hearing by Screening Committee the order of compulsory retirement was passed. According to the petitioner, the said impugned order is not in public interest and has been passed arbitrarily by a non-speaking order without assigning any reason.