ADYA PRASAD PANDEY Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) R. B. Misra, J. Heard Sri T. N. Tiwari, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sandeep Mukherji learned Standing Counsel. In this petition prayer has been made for quashing the impugned order dated 31-3-1995 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) whereby the petitioner has been compulsorily retired in the public interest on considering the recommendation of the Screening Committee in view of Fundamental Rule 56 (c) Volume II, Part 2 to 4 of the 'financial Hand Book'. The petitioner's date of birth is 4-8-1943, who was to attain the age of retirement on 4-8-2001. According to the petitioner he had already served the various department for about 30 years and nine months.

(2.) I have seen the service records of the petitioner for the years 1983-84, 1984-85, 1985-86, 1986-87, 1987-88, 1988-89, 1989-90, 1990-91, 1991-92 and 1992-93 where, in the character roll, the remarks are ordinary as well as bad and on the basis of the service record the petitioner was not found to be retained in service, the members of the screening committee have perused and analysed the documents, records and passed order of compulsory retirement and has voluntarily retired the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the present impugned order of compulsory retirement dated 31-3-1995 has been passed by way of punishment beyond jurisdiction in ordinarily manner and without affording the proper opportunity of hearing and without giving show cause notice to the petitioner.

(3.) ACCORDING to the learned counsel for the petitioner the public interest in relation to public administration envisages retention of honest and efficient employees in service and dispensing with services of those who are inefficient, dead-wood or corrupt and dishonest in view of Brij Mohan Singh v. State of Punjab, (1987) 2 SCR 583; AIR 1987 SC 948. In the present case warning have been given to bring the improvement of the petitioner. The provisions of compulsory retirement are constant reminders to the Government servants to conduct themselves properly, diligently and efficiently throughout their service career State of U. P. v. Chandra Mohan, AIR 1977 SC 2411; (1977) 4 SCC 345.