RAM PAL SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was an employee of the Central Institute of Plastic Engineering & Technology (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Institute'). He was posted at Patna as Manager (Processing/Testing) when an order of his compulsory retirement from service was issued on May 16, 2000. This writ petition has been filed challenging the action of the Institute in compulsorily retiring the petitioner from service. However, the order of compulsory retirement was not enclosed with the writ petition and it was stated that it was not served upon the petitioner. A prayer was, therefore, made to direct the concerned authorities to produce the order of compulsory retirement for being quashed by this Court. THE impugned order, dated 16.5.2001 is brought on record as Annexure A/1 to the counter-affidavit. According to the respondent authorities the order of compulsory retirement along with a cheque for Rs. 57,444 being the petitioner's salary for three months' notice period was repeatedly sent to him but he refused/avoided to receive it.

(2.) FROM the impugned order it appears that the petitioner was retired from service in terms of F.R. 56(i). It needs to be clarified here that normally the provisions of the Fundamental Rules would not apply to anyone other than an employee of the Central Government but it seems (from the impugned order itself) that the Fundamental Rules were expressly adopted by the Institute to cover its employees.

(3.) DR. S.N. Jha, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the order of compulsory retirement was illegal, had and unsustainable because it levelled charges against the petitioner and was evidently passed as a measure of punishments. The relevant portion of the impugned order of compulsory retirement is re-produced below: