JAGMAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner impugns the order of compulsory retirement Annexure P-4 passed by the respondents retiring him from service on attaining the age of 55 years on the ground that his service record was not good.

(2.) The petitioner was appointed as JBT Teacher with the Education Department on 20.9.1956 and was allocated to the State of Haryana upon its reorganisation. The petitioner after approval by the S.S.S.Board, was kept in the Master's cadre and his services were confirmed vide order dated 5.7.1984. It has been averred in the petition that the work and conduct of the petitioner was satisfactory and he earned his due promotions and crossed other statutory bars pertaining to the efficiency etc. in due time.

(3.) On 16.6.1992, the petitioner received a notice-cum-retirement (compulsory) order dated 3.6.1992 informing him that as per the provisions of Punjab Civil Service Rules, he stood retired compulsorily at the age of 55 years in public interest. The petitioner attributed malice to one R.K.Rao, Head Master who recorded his ACRs for the years 1982-83, 1983-84 and 1986-87 and he had been categorized as 'Average'. He represented against these ACRs which representations were still pending when the order of compulsory retirement was passed. The reply to this plea of the petitioner is evasive as the respondents have not categorically stated as to what happened to the representations submitted by the petitioner against his adverse remarks. This fact essentially could be taken as an adverse inference against the respondents in the absence of any specific denial. The service record of the petitioner has been appended with the reply which is extracted here below :- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_1326_LAWS(P&H)7_2013_1.html</FRM>