NAMDEO MAHADEO SURJUSE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner working as a Constable in Maharashtra Police Service and compulsorily retired w. e. f. from 24. 8. 2000 under Rule 65 (l) (b) of the Maharashtra Civil services (Pension) Rules, 1982 has thrown a challenge to common order dated 24. 8. 2000 passed by Maharashtra Administrative tribunal, Nagpur Bench dismissing Original application Nos. 159/1996 and 513/1999 preferred by him challenging notice dated 28. 5. 1995 issued by respondent no. 3 informing that he would be retired in public interest w. e. f. 22. 8. 1995 or after expiry of three months period from the receipt of the said notice and against order dated 24. 5. 1999 passed by respondent no. 3 compulsorily retiring him. The petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside the order dated 24. 8. 2000 passed by the tribunal and directing respondents for reinstating and continuing him in service till superannuation.

(2.) The facts giving rise to the controversy arisen in present petition are as under: the petitioner belonging to Nomadic tribe was appointed on 10. 6. 1963 in maharashtra Police Services. The date of birth of petitioner being 1. 7. 1943, he was due for superannuation on 1. 7. 2001 i. e. after completion of age of 58 years.

(3.) Original Application No. 616/ 1995 preferred by the petitioner before maharashtra Administrative Tribunal challenging the notice dated 22. 5. 1995 was disposed of by said Tribunal vide order dated 4. 12. 1995 directing respondents for considering the representations made by petitioner and continuing him in service till same were decided.