LAXMI NARIAN JAIN Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in the present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to order, Annexure P- 1, dated 13.12.1991 vide which, the Director of Primary Education, Haryana, Chandigarh, ordered compulsory retirement of the petitioner in view of Rule 3.26 of CSR Volume-I Part I read with Rule 5.32 A(c) and note thereunder of the Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume-II, as applicable to the State of Haryana, on his attaining the age of 55 years. With a view to find out as to whether the petitioner had such service record that he can be asked to be prematurely retired, it is essential to examine his service record. It is conceded position under the law that service record of an employee, immediately preceding the date of compulsory retirement, is the most crucial and, thus, has necessarily to be examined.

(2.) On the basis of adverse entries recorded in the Annual Confidential Reports, Annexures R-I to R-III, no case is made out for quashing order, Annexure P-I, impugned in the present petition.

(3.) Mr. Sharma, learned counsel representing the petitioner, however, vehemently contends that order of voluntary retirement cannot entail an order of stoppage of pensionary and other post retiral benefits and the petitioner has not been made-over any post retiral benefits till date from time, order, Annexure P-I, was passed. There is no averment made in the wit petition that the petitioner has not been paid any post retiral benefits. It appears to this Court that this averment could not be Trade because the petitioner could not have been aware at the time present petition was filed that he would not be paid his post retiral benefits. There cannot be any dispute that order of compulsory retirement does not visit an employee with such a consequence as that he may not be even entitled to the post retiral benefits. If, therefore, the respondents have not paid post retiral benefits including the pension to the petitioner, same shall be made-over to him.