Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from the compulsory retirement of an engineer employed in the Central Public Works Department, who challenged the order under Fundamental Rule 56(j). The petitioner, born on 10.2.1922, was appointed as a Section Officer in 1947 and promoted to various positions, including officiating Assistant Engineer and Executive Engineer. He was compulsorily retired effective from 5.11.1976, having attained the age of 50 years. The petitioner contended that the retirement order was invalid as per the precedent set in Union of India v. K.R. Tahiliani, which stated that Rule 56(j)(i) did not apply to officiating government servants. The Supreme Court, however, overruled this precedent, asserting that Rule 56(j)(i) encompasses all government servants in Class I or Class II service, regardless of whether they hold their positions substantively, temporarily, or on an officiating basis. The court recognized that the purpose of the rule is to allow for compulsory retirement in the public interest and that the classification of government servants into two categories serves a specific purpose. The court ultimately directed the Union of India to pay the petitioner his salary and allowances from the date of compulsory retirement until his normal superannuation date of 29.2.1980, acknowledging that while he could not return to service, he was entitled to pecuniary benefits. The court also allowed similar petitions from other petitioners in the same situation, quashing their retirement orders and granting them similar relief.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Compulsory Retirement - Applicability of Fundamental Rule 56(j)(i) - Fundamental Rule 56(j)(i) applies to Government servants in Class I or Class II service or post on substantive, temporary or officiating basis - The court held that the classification of government servants under this rule does not exclude those in officiating positions, thus allowing the petitioner's claim for salary and allowances until normal superannuation (Paras 637-639).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a government servant in officiating capacity can be compulsorily retired under Fundamental Rule 56(j)(i)
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition, directing the Union of India to pay the petitioner salary and allowances from 5.11.1976 to 29.2.1980, and quashed the compulsory retirement order.
Law Points
- Compulsory retirement
- Fundamental Rules
- Government servants
- Class I and Class II service
- Officiating capacity
- Public interest
