- (1.)The Union of India is in appeal against the judgement of central administrative tribunal, allahabad bench (hereinafter referred to as "the tribunal") in OA no. 560/ 89. An order of compulsory retirement of the respondent in exercise of power conferred under rule 56 (j) of the fundamental rules was assailed before the tribunal by the respondent, who on the date of compulsory retirement on 31.10. 1988 was continuing as a grade-1 income tax officer.
(2.)Be it stated that he had initially been appointed way back in 1959 as an inspector and was promoted to income tax officer grade-II in 1973. He was granted officiating promotion as income tax officer grade-l in the year 1980 and got regular promotion as income tax officer grade-l in 1984 and was continuing as such till the date of his compulsory retirement. The tribunal by the impugned judgment quashed the order of compulsory retirement inter alia on the ground that the employer did not follow the instructions issued by the government of India on 5.6.1978 inasmuch as an option to the employee to revert back to his post of income tax officer grade-II was required to be given. The order of compulsory retirement was set aside and the tribunal directed that the procedure indicated in the government circular dated 5.6.1978, be followed.
(3.)Against the aforesaid order, special leave applications had been filed and leave was granted by this Court on 17.10. 1994, but the order of the tribunal has not been stayed. The learned counsel is not in a position to tell us as to whether pursuant to the order of the tribunal the respondent was allowed to continue in service till he attained his superannuation. The counsel for the respondent having been elevated as a judge of allahabad High Court, there has been no further appearance on behalf of the respondent and therefore, we have discharged the duty of scrutinizing the materials more minutely to find out whether the impugned judgment of the tribunal can at all be sustained.