STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. GURDAS MAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendant has come up in regular second appeal against the judgment and decree of the first appellate Court reversing on appeal those of the trial Judge and granting a declaration to the respondent/plaintiff that the order dated May 17, 1985 prematurely retiring him from Government service is illegal and invalid.

(2.) The facts :-

(3.) The defendant in the written statement pleaded that during the year 1977-78, the performance of the plaintiff was found unsatisfactory and the Annual Confidential Report for the period from April 1, 1977 to March 31, 1978 contained adverse remarks, which were conveyed to the plaintiff. His representation was rejected. It was admitted that the plaintiff was appointed as Executive Engineer vide order dated October 10, 1979, but since his work was not found satisfactory during the period he remained on probation, he was reverted to the post of Sub-Divisional Engineer vide order dated October 8, 1982. However, this order was subsequently rescinded and he was declared to have completed his probation period of one year. The representations filed by him could not be disposed of for want of result of the enquiry. The representations were still under consideration when the order of premature retirement was passed. It was denied that the adverse remarks for the period from August 1, 1981 to March 31, 1982 were made on the complaint made by Shri A.K. Batra, Junior Engineer. It was admitted that representation against those remarks were pending consideration when the order of premature retirement was passed. The adverse remarks for the period from June 3, 1983 to November 13, 1983 were recorded on the basis of overall performance of the plaintiff and not merely on the basis of the complaints. No representation was made against the adverse remarks within limitation. It was further pleaded that the premature retirement was legal and valid.