SIDDHA NATH KHATKI Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the validity of the order dated 26.5.2005 by which he has been compulsorily retired in public interest. The petitioner also seeks a direction to the respondents to continue him in service and to accord him all the benefits.

(2.) BACKGROUND facts leading to filing of the instant writ petition briefly stated are that the petitioner joined as Civil Judge, Class II on 11.1.1977. By order dated 26.8.2011, the services of the petitioner were confirmed w.ef. 1.3.1981. He was promoted to the post of Chief Judicial Magistrate vide order dated 28.10.1991. The petitioner was further promoted to the post of Additional District Judge and was posted at Mandsaur and was confirmed on the post of Additional District Judge in the year 1998. The petitioner was thereafter granted Junior Administrative Grade and subsequently, vide order dated 9.6.1999, the petitioner was awarded Selection Grade. Thereafter, in the meeting of the Administrative Committee of the High Court held on 13.4.2005, the case of the petitioner was considered. The Committee came to the conclusion that the petitioner having attained the age of 58 years, be retired from service in public interest. The resolution passed by the Administrative Committee was placed before the Full Court in its meeting held on 16.4.2005 in which the recommendations of the Administrative Committee were approved. Accordingly, by order dated 26.5.2005, the petitioner has been retired from service in public interest. In the aforesaid factual backdrop, the petitioner has approached this Court.

(3.) ON the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.2 submitted that the entire service record of the petitioner was considered by the Administrative Committee of the High Court. Thereupon, the Administrative Committee came to the conclusion that it was desirable in public interest to retire the petitioner in public interest. Accordingly, a recommendation was made by the Administrative Committee for retiring the petitioner compulsorily. The said recommendation of the Administrative Committee was approved by the Full Court in its meeting held on 16.4.2005. The order of compulsory retirement of the petitioner does not suffer from any infirmity.