REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

K.N.SINGH Appellant

V/S

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

AUDH NARAIN SRIVASTAVA V. STATE OF U.P. [REFERRED TO]
SHYAMLAL VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. COLLECTOR J N SINHA [REFERRED TO]
KRISHENA KUMAR VS. S P SAKSENA [REFERRED TO]
SWAMI SARAN SAKSENA VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
D RAMASWAMI VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [REFERRED TO]
TEJPAL SINGH VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
BAIKUNTHA NATH DAS VS. CHIEF DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER BARIPADA [REFERRED TO]
POSTS AND TELEGRAPHS BOARD VS. C S N MURTHY [REFERRED TO]
S RAMACHANDRARAJU VS. STATE OF ORISSA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. BIHARI LAL [REFERRED TO]
SUKHDEO VS. COMMISSIONER AMRAVATI DIVISION AMRAVATI ANOTHER [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ORISSA VS. RAM CHANDRA DAS [REFERRED TO]
I K MISHRA VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. GURDAS SINGH [REFERRED TO]
M S BINDRA VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. SURYAKANT CHUNILAL SHAH [REFERRED TO]
RAJAT BARAN ROY VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [REFERRED TO]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD VS. SARNAM SINGH [REFERRED TO]
PARBODH SAGAR VS. PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD [REFERRED TO]
RAMESH CHANDRA ACHARYA VS. REGISTRAR HIGH COURT OF ORISSA [REFERRED TO]
BADRINATH VS. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. VIJAY KUMAR JAIN [REFERRED TO]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASHTAN VS. P P SINGH [REFERRED TO]
JUGAL CHANDRA SAIKIA VS. STATE OF ASSAM [REFERRED TO]
NAWAL SINGH VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed for quashing the orders dated 25/2/1995 and 8/3/1995 (Annexures 2 and 3 respectively), by which the petitioner had been (July-42) compulsorily retired in exercise of powers under Rule 56(c) of the U.P. Fundamental Rules.

(2.) The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that petitioner, who was a judicial officer in the State of Uttar Pradesh, was promoted to the Higher Judicial Service vide order dated 23/7/1984. Subsequently, in view of the provisions of Rule 27 of the U.P. Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1975 he had been granted the Selection Grade in the High Judicial Service in September, 1994. Subsequently, he was selected for appointment to the post of President, District Consumer Forum on 24.11.1994. He stood transferred vide order dated 20.1.1995 on administrative ground from Saharanpur to Ballia. He was awarded adverse entry on the basis of the inspection report of the Hon'ble Administrative Judge, and thus, he was compulsorily retired under the said Rule 45(c) of the Fundamental Rules. Hence this petition.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that petitioner's service record has been excellent. He had been not only promoted to the U.P. Higher Judicial Service but was also granted the Selection Grade. There was no occasion for the High Court to recommend the compulsory retirement of the petitioner. Allowing the officer to cross the efficiency bar, or promoting to a higher pay scale takes away the effect of every adverse entry even if such an entry is in existence. Therefore, even if there was some adverse entry against the petitioner, that could not be taken into account. The proper procedure has not been followed. The orders impugned are, therefore, liable to be quashed.

Click here to view full judgment.

K N SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address