STATE OF M P Vs. B L KAUL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FEELING aggrieved by the order passed by the M. P. State Administrative Tribunal whereunder allowing the application filed by the respondent No. 1, the order compulsorily retiring him from service dated 1-10-1997 had been quashed with a direction to reinstate him forthwith and pay to him all consequential benefits of the salary etc. , the State has, by means of the present writ petition, approached this Court seeking redress praying for the reversal of the impugned order passed by the Tribunal.

(2.) WE have heard the learned Government Advocate representing the petitioner as well as the learned counsel representing the contesting respondent and have carefuly perused the record.

(3.) THE facts in brief, shorn of details and necessary for the disposal of this writ petition lie in a narrow compass. The State Government had issued a Circular dated 13th of January, 1997 in supersession of its previous orders constituting Screening Committee laying down the norms and the procedure to be adopted while considering the cases of the employees who deserved to be compulsorily retired on their attaining the age of 55 years exercising the jurisdiction envisaged under Fundamental Rule 56 or on their completing the 25 years of service, exercising the jurisdiction envisaged under Section 42 of the Pension Rules of 1976. In the aforesaid circular it was indicated that the Government desired that the directions contained in the circular should be strictly complied with. The Screening Committee constituted for considering the cases of Gazetted Officers was to consist of-- (a) A Secretary of the department as a Convenor, (b) Head of the Department as a Member, (c) Secretary, General Administration Department as a Member. Thus, this Screening Committee was to consist of three members.