VEER BHAN Vs. HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-Veer Bhan has filed these two separate writ petitions assailing the correctness of the order passed by the respondents compulsorily retiring the petitioner on attaining the age of 55 years in the exercise of its powers under Rule 3.26 (d) of the Civil Service Rules Vol.1 (Part I) as applicable in the State of Haryana. In the second writ petition, the petitioner prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus to direct the respondents to release all the retiral benefits due towards him.

(2.) Some facts are required to be noticed. The petitioner was appointed as a Junior Engineer on 3/12/1985. He was ordered to be compulsorily retired by the appointing authority on 31/1/2017. The aforesaid order has been passed in the exercise of powers as noticed above. Hence, Rule 3.26 (d) is extracted as under:-

(3.) Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and with their able assistance perused the respective paper books. It may be noted here that the record of the Annual Confidential Reports with respect to the petitioner has been sent on the official email of the Court and the same has also been examined.