Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, Oct 10: Division Bench of High Court while dismissing the appeal of Government against the single bench judgment quashing the order of compulsory retirement of Government said the Government has ignored its own instructions.
The Division Bench of Chief Justice Badar Durrez Ahmad and Justice Sanjeev Kumar upheld the judgment of single bench whereby compulsory retirement of an employee as ‘dead wood’ was quashed.
“We do not find any legal infirmity in the Judgment impugned, which may call for any interference in this intra court appeal. The appeal, therefore, fails and the same is dismissed accordingly”, DB concluded.
Court said Government has not only ignored the well settled legal principles but ignored their own instructions as well and thus acted arbitrarily.
Abdul Majid Wani at the relevant time was working as Patwari in PatwarHalqa, Nunner, Ganderbal. On the allegations of corruption, FIR No. 01 of 2010 was registered in Police Station, Vigilance Organization, Kashmir on 7th January, 2010. Accordingly, the Vigilance Sleuth laid a trap to nab the respondent demanding and accepting the bribe red handed.
He was found to have demanded and accepted Rs. 5,000 as bribe from the complainant Ghulam Hassan Wani and was thus caught red handed by the members of the trap team. The matter was investigated and it was prima facie established that he had demanded and accepted bribe from the complainant. The matter was thus placed before the Government for sanction which was accorded by the Government vide Government Order No. 64-GAD (Vig) of 2010 dated 13thOctober, 2010.
The challan was ultimately presented against the respondent in the competent court of jurisdiction which is stated to be still pending.
Due to his involvement in the case, the respondent was also arrested and remained in custody beyond the period of 48 hours. He was, therefore, placed under suspension. The suspension of the respondent along with other delinquent officials was reviewed by the Committee constituted by the Government and vide order No. FC (Adm)/20 of 2011 dated 28th April, 2011, the respondent amongst others was reinstated with a rider that he would not be given any sensitive posting till the criminal case pending against him was decided in the Court.
“Pendency of a criminal case against a public servant, particularly one registered pursuant to a trap laid by a Vigilance Sleuth may be a relevant factor but cannot be made the sole basis for issuance of order of compulsory retirement”, DB said.
Court after hearing both parties at length and even with support of various Supreme Court Judgments said, the compulsory retirement in service jurisprudence has two meanings.
“In some disciplinary rules, compulsory retirement is punitive in nature and one of the penalties that may be inflicted on a Government servant consequent upon finding of guilt recorded in the disciplinary proceedings.”
“In such a case, compulsory retirement is neither a punishment nor a penalty. The person compulsorily retired in public interest does not face any stigma nor does it entail any loss of retiral benefits. So long as the opinion forming the basis of order of compulsory retirement is formed bona fide on the basis of rational material and in public interest, the same cannot be ordinarily interfered with by the Court”, reads the judgment.
Follow our WhatsApp channel