RAVI R. SERVICE NO. G/2201010M Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The brief facts of the case in a nutshell are that:

(2.) Heard Mr. B.C. Das, Mr. S. Banik, Mr. R. Mazumdar, Mr. H.G. Boruah and Mr. D. Thabah, learned counsel for the petitioners who submitted that the power of the Appointing Authority to retire a Government Servant in public interest on completion of 30(thirty) years of service is exercised under Rule 48 (1) b of the Central Civil Service (Pension), Rules, 1972. This power is never to be exercised for removing a person on medical grounds. In the course of argument, the learned counsel also relied on Section 47 of the person with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995. The learned counsel also pointed out the Assam Rifles Medical (Categorization and Invalidation) Rules-1988, specifically the Rule 26 of the Assam Rifles Rules, 2010 and Rule 12(1) and Rule 12(2) of the Assam Rifles Medical (Categorization and Invalidation) Rules-1988 as well as Rule 16 of the Assam Rifles Medical (Categorization and Invalidation) Rules-1988 and Rule 11 of the Assam Rifles Medical (Categorization and Invalidation) Rules-1988.

(3.) On the other hand, Mr. K. Khan, Mr. K. Paul and Mr. N. Mozika, learned CGC?s appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioners named above were asked to go on compulsory retirement after fulfilling all the procedures, norms and rules and also contended that, compulsory retirement in these instant cases the petitioners are getting full benefit after completion of 30(thirty) years of their service and they are eligible also for re-employment. As such, they should not have any grievances against the compulsory retirement.