STATE TIMES NEWS
JAMMU: In a significant judgment, Division Bench of State High Court comprising Chief Justice N Paul Vasanthakumar and Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur, on Saturday set-aside the order of compulsorily retirement of District & Sessions Judge Brij Mohan Gupta.
The judgment came in a petition filed by Brij Mohan Gupta, praying for declaring Government Order No.08-LD(A) of 2014 dated January, 1, 2014 issued by the Government sanctioning compulsory retirement on the basis of the recommendations made by the High Court in its communication dated June, 11, 2013 as illegal and against the provisions of law.
The petitioner had sought quashing of communication of the High Court dated June, 11, 2013, recommending compulsory retirement and for issuance of directions directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to complete his service up to 60 years with all consequential benefits.
According to the petitioner, he was selected and appointed as Officiating Munsiff by order of the Governor dated October, 26, 1983 and was posted as Munsiff, Banihal by High Court order No.721 dated October 27, 1983.
He was promoted as Sub Judge by order dated November, 23, 1995 and considering his integrity and performance, he was considered for appointment as District and Session judge and ultimately promoted as District and Sessions judge by order dated October, 24, 2001. He was confirmed on the said post after completing the probation period on 10 June 2003.
The petitioner was given selection grade in the cadre of District and Sessions Judge with effect from May, 1, 2009 by order dated May, 30, 2010. Inspection of his court was made for some time and ACR entries were made sometime on the basis of assessment and sometime without any inspection. On petitioner’s completing 58 years of age, the High Court considered his performance in terms of Article 226(2) of the Jammu & Kashmir Civil Service Regulations and 2nd respondent recommended to issue compulsory retirement instead of retiring the petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner was that due to low pendency of cases where he served the disposal was less at the fag-end of his service and that was taken as a ground for not extending his service beyond 58 years.
“Division Bench having regard to the fact that there was no allegation of corruption or mis-behaviour of any kind and he served with honesty i.e. unblemished, the orders impugned retiring the petitioner compulsory cannot be sustained as the same are not in accordance with the judgment of Supreme Court cited supra.
Hence the said orders are set aside and the petitioner shall be issued a simple retirement order, retiring him from service with effect from 31st August, 2013. It is also made clear that retirement order issued to the petitioner at the age of 58 years shall not be treated as disqualification for any future appointment”, with these observations Division Bench allowed the petition and directed Registrar General to issue order as per above directions within a period of one week.
