NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday said that an order of premature retirement should be passed on the basis of entire service records. “The entire service record is to be taken into consideration which would include the ACRs of the period prior to the promotion. The order of premature retirement is required to be passed on the basis of entire service records, though the recent reports would carry their own weight,” said a bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and V Ramasubramanian.
The bench, while setting aside an order of the Delhi High Court, also said that an order of compulsory retirement is in the public interest and is passed on the subjective satisfaction of the Government. It said that the order of compulsory retirement is not liable to be quashed by the Court merely for the reason that uncommunicated adverse remarks were taken into consideration.
The top court was hearing an appeal filed by the Central Industrial Security Force challenging an order of the Delhi high court which set aside an order of premature retirement of a constable. The apex court referred to its earlier decisions and said the courts should not interfere with the exercise of the power of compulsory retirement if arrived at bonafide and based on material available on record.
“It was held that an order of compulsory retirement is not an order of punishment. It is a prerogative of the Government but it should be based on material and has to be passed on the subjective satisfaction of the Government and that it is not required to be a speaking order,” the bench said.
The top court said that the High Court has completely misdirected itself while setting aside the order of premature retirement of the constable.
“The writ petitioner has been awarded a number of punishments prior to his promotion including receiving illegal gratification from a transporter while on duty in the year 1993. There are also allegations of absence from duty and overstaying of leave. After promotion, a punishment of four days fine was imposed on the charge of sleeping on duty and two days fine was imposed for overstaying from joining time,” the bench said.