- (1.) These two special appeals raise the same questions and it will be convenient to decide them by a common judgment. Both the appeals have been filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh. They are directed against the judgments of a learned Single Judge allowing writ petitions filed by respondent No. 1 and quashing an order of compulsory retirement. The learned Single Judge repelled the various sub-missions raised in support of the writ petitions challenging the order of compulsory retirement except one. He held that the Government had validly adopted the criterion of 'above average' while considering the question of compulsory retirement of those officers who had reached the age of 55 years, but in his opinion, no reasonable person could have come to the conclusion that respondent No. 1 in both the cases was not above average, on a consideration of his character roll for the last 10 years.
(2.) The learned Advocate-General appearing for the appellant State contested the aforesaid view of the learned Single Judge. Mr. Khare appearing for the respondents supported the judgment of the learned Single Judge on the alternative ground that the criterion of above average was arbitrary and void.
(3.) Previously, the age of superannuation of Government servants was 55 years. It was raised to 58 years. The first proviso to Fundamental Rule 56 (a) provides that the appointing authority may at any time without assigning any reason, require the government servant to retire on three month's notice or pay in lieu of the whole or part thereof, after be attains the age of 55 years. It also conferred a right upon the government servant to retire after giving three month's notice to the appointing authority after attaining the age of 55 years. The first explanation provides that the decision of the appointing authority under the first proviso to require the government servant to retire as specified therein shall be taken if it appears to the said authority to be in public interest and the State Government may from time to time issue executive instructions indicating guiding principles in that behalf. Explanation (2) provides that every such decision shall, unless the contrary is proved, be presumed to have been taken in public interest.;