JAI PRAKASH PASWAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the Respondent No.1, the Union of India and learned counsel for the Respondent No.3, the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Employee's Provident Fund Organization, Bihar and the Respondent No.4, the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Employee's Provident Fund Organization Bhagalpur.

(2.) The petitioner has preferred this writ petition against the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna, dated 3rd of December, 2008 contained in Annexure-'5', whereby O.A. No.883 of 2004, preferred by the petitioner, was dismissed and no interference was made with the order of compulsory retirement under FR-56(j) dated 15.1.2004 and the order dated 28.9.2004 rejecting the petitionees representation against the order of compulsory retirement.

(3.) The petitioner claims that he had smooth career and got timely promotions and he was never awarded punishment during his service career and has been compulsorily retired on the basis of adverse A.C.Rs. showing him to be average or below average during the year 1998-99 and 1999-2000 by ignoring much improved grading in the A.C.Rs. of succeeding three years.