TOOFANI PRASAD Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -This special appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 17.5.2004, passed by the learned single Judge by which the writ petition filed by the petitioner-appellant for quashing the order of compulsory retirement, has been dismissed.

(2.) THE facts and circumstances giving rise to the case are that the petitioner-appellant was a class-III employee in the Judgeship at Varanasi. A Screening Committee was constituted by the District Judge, Varanasi for screening the service records of class-III and IV employees. THE name of the petitioner was also recommended for compulsory retirement. However, taking a lenient view, the learned District Judge did not accept the report of the Screening Committee and gave one chance to the petitioner-appellant to improve his work. Subsequently, another Screening Committee headed by 1st Additional District Judge, Varanasi examined the service records of various employees with that of the petitioner-appellant and recommended his name for retirement vide report dated 8.1.2002. THE District Judge, vide order dated 17.1.2002, after considering the facts and examining the record, passed the order of compulsory retirement of the petitioner-appellant in public interest. Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred the appeal in the High Court on administrative side which had been dismissed vide order dated 7.8.2003. Subsequently, he challenged both the orders by filing Writ Petition No. 16086 of 2004, which has been dismissed vide order dated 17.05.2004. Hence the present special appeal.

(3.) WE have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.