GANGARAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are three writ petitions under Art. 226 of the Constitution by three permanent member? of the Rajasthan Administrative Service directed against an order of the Government of Rajasthan compulsory retiring them from service under Rule 244 (3) of the Rajasthan Service Rules with effect from 1. 1. 1960 without giving them an opportunity of showing cause against it. They can conveniently be disposed of by one judgment as the main ground taken in all of them is the same, namely that the order retiring them compulsory from service before the age of superannuation is void and inoperative as it was passed without giving them an opportunity of showing cause against it. The petitions were contested on behalf of the State,

(2.) THE relevant part of the impugned order runs as follows? - "the following officers are retired compulsorily from the Government Service, in the public interest, under Rule 244 (2) Rajasthan Service Rules, with effect from the 1st January 1960: - (1) Shri Ganga Ram Purohit, R. A. S. (2) Shri Sohan Lal Surana, R. A. S. (3) Shri Amar Nath Purohit, R. A. S. " Rule 244 of the Rajasthan Service Rules is reproduced below: - Optional retirement after completing 30 years of service - (1) A Government servant may retire from service any time after completing 30 years' qualifying service provided that he shall give in this behalf, a notice in writing to the appropriate authority, at least 3 months before the date on which he wishes to retire. Compulsory retirement after completion of 25 years service - (2) Government retains an absolute right to retire any Government servant after he has completed 25 years' qualifying service without giving any reasons and no claim to special compensation on this account will be entertained. This right will not be exercised except when it is in public interest to dispense with further service of a Government servant. NOTES. 1. THE right conferred by Rule 244 (2) is intended to be exercised only against a Government servant whose efficiency is impaired, but against whom it is not desirable to make formal charges of inefficiency or who has ceased to be fully efficient but not to such a degree as to warrant his retirement on compassionate allowance. It is not the intention to use this rule as a financial weapon, that is to say, the provision should be used only in the case of Government servants who are considered unfit for retention on personal as opposed to financial grounds. 2. Compulsory retirement under this rule does not attract the provisions of clause (2) or Art. 311 of the Constitution because such retirement is not conceived as a penalty but as the exercise of a right reserved to Government of retiring a Government servant alter he has served for a certain length or time. Accoraingly, the procedure laid down in the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, for formal proceedings against Government servants before removing them from service is not meant to apply to such cases.

(3.) THE administrative decision of the Government of India on the provision of compulsory retirement under Note 1 to Art. 465 A as contained in G. I. M. H. A. letter No. 26/8/48-Ests. dated 17. 7. 1948 was as follows: - "it has been held that sec. 240 (3) of Government of India Act, 1935, (corresponding to Art. 311 (2) of the Constitution of India) is applicable to compulsory retirement effected in pursuance of Note 1 to Art. 465a of the Civil Service Regulations, as it stands, i. e. including the words "without giving any reasons etc. " Accordingly the officer concerned has to be given a reasonable opportunity to show cause against the proposed action under that Section. THE Government of India, however, add that the procedure laid down in Rule 55 of the Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules for formal proceedings against Govern ment servants before removing them from service is not meant to apply to cases of compulsory retirement mentioned in the preceding paragraph because Rule 5 5 should be read with Rule 49 of the Rules and regarded as applying only when dismissal, removal or reduction is imposed as a penalty under Rule 49. Compulsory retirement of an officer in pursuance of Note 1 to Art. 464-A of the Civil Service Regulations is not conceived as a "penalty" imposed "for good sufficient reasons" under Rule 49 but as the exercise of a right reserved to itself by Government under the Regulations. "