SI JAGDISH CHAND Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED counsel for the parties have been heard at length and pleadings on record have been perused.

(2.) THE petitioner, who was working as Sub Inspector in the Haryana Police, has impugned in the instant writ petition the notice dated 16.9.2009 issued by the Superintendent of Police, Jind, Annexure P4, for not retaining him in service upon attaining the age of 55 years on 4.12.2009 and as such, to compulsorily retire him in service.

(3.) THERE can be no dispute as regards the proposition that when a notice of compulsory retirement is issued by the competent authority upon its own evaluation of the service record of an employee, the scope of judicial review would be limited.