STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. RATTAN KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal has been admitted several years back without framing any substantial questions of law. I therefore frame the following as:

(2.) Both the counsel are prepared to ague the case and hence, I proceed to hear the case on merits. The appeal is by the State challenging the judgment of the Lower Appellate Court decreeing the suit filed by the plaintiff. The suit was for a declaration that the order of compulsory retirement issued by the State through Senior Superintendent of Police by his order dated 05.07.1984 as confirmed by Deputy Advocate General of Police by his order dated 20.09.1984 were null and void. The plaintiff's contention was that there was no basis for compulsory retirement and it was passed by an officer who was not competent to do so. The trial Court dismissed the suit, but, in appeal, the Court held that the State had not filed the ACRs inspite of notice to produce and therefore, an adverse inference must be drawn.

(3.) The Lower Appellate Court did not find that there was any objective material on the basis of which a subjective satisfaction could be drawn that the plaintiff was required to be compulsorily retired for public interest.