BHAGVANT SINGH PARIHAR Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order of compulsory retirement dated 08.01.99.

(2.) Brief facts are that the petitioner was working as mechanic with the respondent. The respondent passed the impugned order dated 08.01.99 under Rule 42 (1) (b) of the M.P. Civil Service (Pension) Rules 1976, (for short 'the Rules') on the ground that the petitioner had completed 25 years of government service on 03.02.97. The petitioner represented the matter before the State Government against the order of compulsory retirement. The State Government rejected the representation by order dated 15.06.99.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that out of his previous 24 years annual confidential reports, the petitioner has earned 12-B, 1-1 -C and 1 -D in the confidential reports. He further submitted that 1 -D is in respect of the one adverse remark for the year 1992-93, which was communicated to the petitioner in 1998 against which the petitioner had submitted the representation, which was pending, therefore, on the basis of such an ACR alone, he could not be compulsorily retired. He further submitted that as per the judgment of this court in the matter of Chandra Shekhar Shrivastava Vs. State of M.P. and Another reported in 2006 (1) M.P.L.J] 183 and in the matter of Moti Lal Verma Vs. State of M.P. & Others dated 17.02.2009 in W.P. No. 13445 of 2003, the order of compulsory retirement Cannot sustained.