NISHTER AB RUB Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the writ petition, the petitioner has assailed an order dated March 15, 2002 whereby he has been compulsorily retired in public interest on proportionate pension. A learned Single Judge, while considering the writ petition felt that two substantial questions of law have arisen in the matter, which require authoritative pronouncement. The learned Judge, accordingly, referred the writ petition to the Division Bench. That is how the writ petition is before us.

(2.) WE have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of the High Court.

(3.) WHEN the order impugned in the writ petition was passed, the petitioner was a District and Sessions Judge, a member of the State Higher Judicial Service. A disciplinary proceeding was initiated against him. He was charged with the following charges: