MUSHTAQ AHMAD TANGO Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The entire gamut of the controversy raised here in this petition revolves round the plea whether the Government order bearing No. 1275-GAD of 2016 dated 21st of November, 2016, issued by the Government of Jammu and Kashmir, in exercise of powers conferred by Article 226(2) of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services Regulations, whereby notice was given to the petitioner, namely, Shri Mushtaq Ahmad Tenga I/C AEE, Yousmarg Development Authority (under suspension) of the PW(R & B) Department, to the effect that he having already rendered 22 years of service, shall retire from service w.e.f. the forenoon of the 22nd day of November, 2016, can withstand the test of judicial scrutiny.

(2.) The pith and core of the petition of the petitioner is that during the entire tenure of his service, he worked with great deal of honesty and dedication at different places of posting and, at the relevant point of time, i.e. the day when the order aforesaid was issued, he was holding the post of I/C AEE, Yousmarg Development Authority (under suspension) of the PW(R & B) Department. His past Service carrier is unblemished and, all along, he has been given various promotions on the basis of his suitability, merit and excellent service record. During the posting of the petitioner as Assistant Executive Engineer, Doodhpathri Development Authority, a case came to be registered against him by the Vigilance Organization, Kashmir, bearing FIR No. 35/2014. On the basis of the said FIR, the petitioner was placed under suspension vide Government Order No. 01 of 2014 dated 1st of November, 2014. In the said FIR, the charge sheet has been laid before the Court of competent jurisdiction and the case is pending there for the last four to five years. The Respondent Department, instead of nailing down the need to bring the investigation of the case to the logical conclusion, issued the order impugned in the writ petition, whereby the retirement of the petitioner was ordered under Article 226(2) of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services Regulations.

(3.) The Respondents have resisted and controverted the petition of the petitioner, on the grounds, inter alia, that the Government has to perform a multitude of tasks in order to implement various welfare measures of public interest, and the paramount aim is of providing clean and effective administration to the people of the State. In order to make the administration effective, a periodic review of all the Officers is taken up by the Government, the aim and object being to encourage honest and efficient Government servants and, simultaneously, to weed out the inefficient and corrupt Officers from the services in the public interest. Whileas, various incentives and awards are given to the honest and efficient Officers/Officials, recourse is taken to the provisions of Article 226 (2) and (3) of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services Regulations, 1956, for the removal of such Government officials from the State services, who have become deadwood on account of their indulging in inefficient and corrupt practices. The order of compulsory retirement passed in the case of the petitioner is based on the object of weeding out the deadwood from the State services. Article 226 (2) of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services Regulations is designed to infuse the administration with initiative for better administration and for augmenting the general efficiency so as to meet the expanding horizons and cater to the new challenges faced by the State to provide sensitivity, probity, non-irritative public relation and enthusiastic creativity, which can be achieved by eliminating the deadwood. In order to consider the case of the petitioner for compulsory retirement, under and in terms of the Government order bearing No. 17-GAD (Vig.) 2015 dated 20th of May, 2015, sanction was accorded to the constitution of a Committee to consider the cases of the Officers/ officials for compulsory retirement. The record regarding the involvement of the petitioner in corrupt practices was placed before the Committee. The cases, in which FIRs have been lodged and are under probe, were placed before the Committee, including the case of the petitioner bearing FIR No. 35/2014 registered by the Vigilance Organization, Kashmir. The Committee, on consideration of the available records, observed that the petitioner does not enjoy good reputation in the public due to his inconsistent conduct over a period of time and that the Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) of the petitioner are incomplete. The Committee also observed that based on a specific complaint with regard to demand of illegal gratification, a trap was laid against the petitioner, the then I/C Assistant Executive Engineer and the petitioner was found demanding and accepting a bribe of Rs. 3,000/- in lieu of release of payments for the construction of Lavatory Block at Tangnar, Doodhpathri, Budgam, leading to the registration of FIR No. 35/2014, in Police Station, VOK, against the petitioner by the Vigilance Organization. The Committee also took note of the fact that the petitioner, while holding a post of great public importance, was caught red handed, demanding and accepting a bribe of Rs. 3,000/-, thereby substantiating the fact he has outlived his utility as a Government servant. The Committee, therefore, recommended for the compulsory retirement of the petitioner in public interest under Article 226 (2) of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services Regulations. The recommendations so made were accepted by the Competent Authority, as a consequence of which, the impugned order was issued. It has been, accordingly, pleaded by the Respondent-State that the impugned order is a legal one. It is in accordance with law. The writ petition, as such, is legally misconceived, untenable, without any merit, and, in sequel thereto, merits dismissal.