SULTAN RAM Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is directed against the order of prc-rna-ture retirement passed on February 21, 1991 by the Director of Secondary Education, Haryana. The order has been challenged as being totally arbitrary and contrary to the decision of this Court in K.K. Vaid vs. State of Haryana, 1990 1 SLR 1.

(2.) In the written statement filed on behalf of the respondents, it has been inter alia averred that according to the instructions issued by the government vide its letter dated August 16,1983, no civil servant can continue in service after the age of 55 years unless he has earned 70 per cent good or better reports during the last ten years. Further a summary sheet of the petitioner's record has been produced for the year from 1979-80 to 1988-89 to show that he does not fulfil the criteria laid down by the government.

(3.) I have heard Shri Surya Kant, Advocate for the petitioner and Shri Jaswant Singh, Advocate for the respondents. Relying on the decision in K.K. Vaid's case Mr. Surya Kant has contended that the petitioner has not been conveyed a single adverse report for the last ten years. All his reports range from average to very good. Accordingly, the learned counsel contends that the impugned order cannot be sustained. Mr. Jaswant Singh learned counsel for the respondents points out that after the declaration of examination results, the reports earned by the petitioner have been down graded as a result of which the petitioner had earned four very good reports, one good and five average reports. On this premises, the learned counsel contends that the petitioner was 'dead-wood' and deserved to be chopped off.