PREM CHAND SANGHI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was initially appointed as an Overseer in the former State of Jaipur on July 26, 1947. He was appointed substantively as an Assistant Engineer in the Public Works Department (Buildings and Roads) of the State of Raj-asthan (hereinafter referred to as 'the P. W. D. ') by an order dated August 17/20, 1953 after he was selected for the aforesaid post by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission. In May, 1955, seven officers of the P. W. D. were suspended for negligence for defective plastering of a school building at Gangapur City and after a departmental enquiry although the other officers were re-instated without any punishment, but punishment was inflicted upon the the petitioner and three grade increments were stopped without cumulative effect by the order dated November 13, 1956.

(2.) THE petitioner was subsequently promoted as Executive Engineer in the P. W. D. of the State on May 10, 1958 and he was confirmed in that capacity by an order dated July 4, 1961 with effect from July 1, 1959. THE petitioner was thereafter promoted as officiating Superintending Engineer on June 28, 1965 and was posted at Bikaner. By an order of the State Government dated July 24, 1970, a recorded warning was administered to the petitioner on the ground that he changed the road alignment without prior sanction of the Chief Engineer during the year 1961 and the petitioner's explanation that he did so to effect economy in the expenditure was rejected. In the year 1961-1962, the then Chief Engineer of the P. W. D. made adverse entries in the confidential rolls of the petitioner, against which he made a representation and the State Government expunged a part of those adverse remarks made by the Chief Engineer by its order dated August 2, 1969, yet another part of such remarks was confirmed by the State Government by its aforesaid order. THEn again adverse entries were made in the confidential rolls of the petitioner for the year 1963-1964. THE petitioner made representations against the aforesaid adverse entries also, but the State Government by its order dated July 13, 1970, refused to expunge the same. THE petitioner's case is that the then Chief Engineer Mr. B. D. Mathur was annoyed with the petitioner and in support of his contention, the petitioner relied upon the remarks dated August 30, 1964 made by Shri Gordhan Singh, the then Secretary of the P. W. D.

(3.) THE provisions of Rule 244 (2) of the Rules were also examined recently by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Tarasingh vs. State of Rajasthan (Writ Petition No. 1253 of 1973, decided on March 19, 1975 ). In the above mentioned case, Ray C J. , speaking for the Court, observed as follows - "the right to be in public employment is a right to hold it according to rules. THE rule speaks of compulsory retirement. THEre is guidance in the rules as to when such compulsory retirement is made. When persons complete 25 years of service and the efficiency of such persons is impaired and yet it is desirable not to bring any charge of inefficiency or incompetency, the Government passes orders of such compulsory retirement. THE Government servant in such a case does not lose the benefits which a Govern ment servant has already earned. THEse orders of compulsory retirement are made in public interest. This is the safety valve of making such orders so that no arbitrariness or bad faith creeps in. "