SHRADDHA VINOD DEO Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

(2.) The petitioner challenges the order of her compulsory retirement passed by the respondents. The contention of the petitioner is that by an order dated 1st September 1990, she was appointed as Judicial Magistrate First Class and posted at Jalgaon. She served at Jalgaon from 1st September 1990 to 3rd March 1991.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that neither a single adverse remark was communicated to the petitioner nor any warning was given to her. The petitioner did not face a single departmental enquiry through out her career. She secured excellent remark like "Noteworthy". The petitioner discharged her duty efficiently in the place like Malegaon and tried sensitive cases. Learned counsel referred to Maharashtra Civil Services Rules, 2008 ("MCSR" for short). Rule 5 thereof refers to the assured career progression scale. It is submitted that benefit under the Assured Career Progression Scale Scheme is given after five years of service considering integrity and overall function of the judicial officer. The petitioner, according to learned counsel, secured positive remarks and in spite of the same the petitioner was compulsorily retired. Learned counsel submits that the Review Committee of the High Court had taken into consideration ACRs for the years 199495; 199596 and 2002 to 2006. It is submitted that the petitioner was not served with any adverse remarks in her service imparted during these six years. Neither any enquiry was conducted against the petitioner nor any showcausenotice was issued to her regarding allegations on account of integrity; behavior; and overall conduct of the petitioner. Learned counsel further submitted that latest ACRs were in favour of the petitioner. Therefore, according to learned counsel, the confidential reports, which were taken into consideration and not communicated to the petitioner could not form basis for taking adverse action against the petitioner.