G.C.Mathur, J. - (1.) By this writ petition the petitioner has challenged an order of the State Government dated June 1, 1970, compulsorily retiring him from service under Article 465 of the Civil Service Regulations.
(2.) The petitioner was initially appointed (as ?) Assistant Engineer in 1940 in the Irrigation Department. In 1948 he vas promoted (as ?) Executive Engineer in which post he was confirmed in 1952. In 1957 he was promoted to the post of Superintending Engineer and was confirmed in that post with effect from August 1, 1964. According to the petitioner he was the senior most amongst the confirmed Superintending Engineers. In the year 1967 the Vigilance Department started some enquiry against the petitioner. During the pendency of this enquiry some other confirmed Superintending Engineers were promoted to the posts of Additional Chief Engineers in the Irrigation Department superseding the petitioner. The vigilance establishment ultimately found no substance in the complaints or allegations against the petitioner. Thereafter on November 7, 1969, the petitioner was also promoted as Additional Chief Engineer and posted as Additional Chief Engineer, Gandak Project at Gorakhpur. On April 30, 1970 the petitioner was transferred from Gorakhpur to Lucknow where he took over charge on April 30, 1970. On June 1, 1970 the impugned order of compulsory retirement was passed. It was served on the petitioner the same day and charge was also taken from him on that very day.
(3.) The petitioner has challenged the impugned order on the following grounds:- 1. That after the passing of the U.P. Fundamental Rule 56 (Amendment and Validation) Act, 1970, Article 465 of the Civil Service Regulations became inoperative and no order of compulsory retirement could validly be passed thereunder. 2. That it was passed mala fide. 3. That the order was passed arbitrarily as there was no material on the basis of which it could reasonably be held that it was in the public interest to compulsorily retire the petitioner. 4. That the impugned order is by way of punishment as it casts a stigma on the petitioner and is invalid as it violates the provision of Article 311 (2) of the Constitution.;