BALDEV SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was working as Patwari with the Department of Revenue and posted at Anoopgarh. He was compulsorily retired by the State Government vide order dated 09.08.2000 (Annx.1). He preferred an appeal against this order before the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur (hereinafter "the Tribunal"), which was dismissed vide order dated 25.10.2001 (Annx.8). By the instant writ petition, the petitioner has challenged both the aforementioned orders.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the State as well as the learned Tribunal have acted arbitrarily and illegally while passing the impugned orders inasmuch as his entire service record was satisfactory and in any event did not warrant his compulsory retirement. He further contended that one similarly situated person, namely Rajesh Ratan, who was also working with the Department of Revenue, had also been compulsorily retired on the same date i.e. 9.8.2000 and he also preferred an appeal before the learned Tribunal, which also was decided on 25.10.2001 whereby he was directed to be reinstated. The service record of the petitioner in comparison with the record of Rajesh Ratan was, at least, comparable if not better and hence, different yard-stick could not have been applied to the case of the petitioner.

(3.) On the other hand, Dr. Pratishtha Sinha, learned Additional Govt. Advocate submitted that the service record of the petitioner was such which justified passing of the order of compulsory retirement.