P.S. MATHUR Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been moved by an employee of the State Government against the order of his compulsory retirement from service.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the Petitioner has challenged the validity of this order on the ground that the order does not comply with the guiding principles laid down by the State Government for compulsory retirement of employees under Article 165 of the Civil Service Regulations. The General directions are contained in the notification dated November 2, 1973. According to this notification the case of compulsory retirement of employees should be considered as regard only those persons whose integrity was doubted or whose efficiency might have gone down to such an extent that no improvement therein could be expected. According to learned Counsel, the material available on record is not sufficient to justify that the Petitioner's integrity was even doubted.

(3.) EVEN in respect of the entry 1971 -72 it cannot be said that integrity had not been doubted. The actual words in the general directions are: "satyanistha sandighdha Ho." 'Sandighdha' means doubted. The word 'doubt' according to the Shorter Oxford Dictionary, Second Edition means: