Competent authority has power to pass an order of compulsory retirement: Allahabad HC

Image
Press Trust of India Prayagraj
Last Updated : Apr 22 2020 | 10:40 PM IST

In a significant judgement passed on Wednesday, the Allahabad High Court ruled that a competent authority has the power to pass an order of compulsory retirement of an employee after recording satisfactory reason in the public interest.

A two-judge bench comprising Justice Biswanath Somadder and Justice Dr. Y K Srivastava allowed the special appeal filed by U P State Electricity Board (UPSEB), challenging the single judge order dated April 17, 2019 whereby compulsory retirement order dated December 23, 1994 passed against the petitioner Raghuraj Singh was quashed and the writ petition was allowed.

"The aggrieved employee cannot challenge the order of his compulsory retirement on the ground that he was not heard before passing of the order of compulsory retirement," the court said in Wednesday's order.

A single judge bench of the court had allowed the writ petition on the ground that there was no material on record which could support the opinion that continuance in service of the petitioner was not in public interest.

It was pleaded by the UPSEB before the division bench that order of compulsory retirement dated December 23, 1994 was passed on the recommendation of the screening committee and the order of the UPSEB dated February 22, 1991.

In the petition a counter affidavit was filed and a stand was taken therein by the Board that impugned compulsory retirement order was passed on the basis of adverse reports, gross negligence in performance of the duties and indiscipline by the petitioner.

It was said that the single judge did not consider the stand of the Board and allowed the writ petition, quashing the compulsory retirement order.

The division bench set aside the single judge order and dismissed the writ petition on Wednesday.

The bench said that concerned authority after recording satisfaction in the order had formed opinion that continuance in the service of the petitioner was not in public interest and therefore had passed an order of compulsory retirement.

The bench said that under the Regulation 2 (b) of U P State Electricity Board (Employees Retirement) Regulation, 1975 the authority has the power to pass the order of compulsory retirement. The single judge had failed to consider the stand taken by the Board, the division bench added.

Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Apr 22 2020 | 10:40 PM IST

Next Story