Excelsior Correspondent
SRINAGAR, Mar 23: High Court has held that the Government order prematurely retiring then In-charge I/C Executive Engineer and Divisional Manager State Financial Corporation (SFC), cannot stand the test of law and reason and set aside them with the direction to authorities to reinstate them.
High Court quashed the dead-wood orders of State Government issued against two employees – Ghulam Nabi Dar and Riyaz Anwar Masoodi, I/C Executive Engineer and I/C Divisional Manager, SFC Division, Zangli respectively.
“Viewed in the context of what has been said and done above, the impugned Government order bearing No. 864-GAD of 2015 dated 30th of June, 2015, cannot stand the test of law and reason”, Justice M K Hanjura concluded.
Court said that it is not based on any material from which a reasonable opinion could be derived to put forth the plea that the petitioners-Ghulam Nabi Dar and Riyaz Anwar Masoodi have outlived their utility as a Government servant or that their conduct was such that their continuance in service would be prejudicial to the public interest.
“Merely that a case or cases have been registered against the petitioner-Dar by the Vigilance Organization cannot form the basis of retiring him compulsorily, as a corollary to which, the impugned order bearing No. 864- GAD of 2015 dated 30th of June, 2015, is quashed”, read the judgment.
Court directed the concerned authorities to reinstate the petitioner and grant him all the consequential benefits, within a period of one month from the date the certified copy of this order is served on them by the petitioner.
After perusal of the APRs, Court said the same have been shelved and have escaped the scrutiny of the committee and the same, it appears to have been done with ultimate aim of showing the petitioner the exit and had these ‘Annual Performance Reports’, been considered, the shit would have hit the fan.
Court also mentioned that the argument of the State counsel that the principles of natural justice cannot be invoked by a public servant in the aid of assailing an order of compulsory retirement and that such an order does not amount to a punishment, is based on the sound principles and cannons of law.
“…but, to say that such an order can be passed by shunning the material on the basis of which such an order can be passed in terms of the rules, regulations and the law governing the subject, is a spurious and a contrived argument. Such an argument is devoid of merit and does not have the legs to stand upon”, court said.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel