Civil Appeal No 1601 of 1970
Appeal from the Judgment and Order dated the 20 2 70 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in LPA No 552 of 1968
V C Mahajan and section section Khanduja for the Appellant
O P Sharma for the Respondent
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by JASWANT SINGH J
The question that arises for decision in this appeal by certificate granted by the High Court of Punjab and 894 Haryana against its Judgment and order dated February 20 1970 in LPA No 552 of 1968 is whether under Rule 532c of the Punjab Civil Service Rules Vol
II the Government can retire an employee on or after he attains the age of 55 years by giving him three months  salary and allowances in lieu of three months  notice
The facts giving rise to the appeal lie in a short compass and may be stated thus Before the partition of the country the appellant joined the Veterinary Department of the Punjab Government as an Assistant Surgeon on December 1 1933
In course of time he was appointed as Director of Animal Husbandry and Warden of Fisheries which post he held from March 16 1957 to August 14 1959 when Shri Pritarn Singh Brar was appointed Director in his place
On Shri Pritam Singh Brar s attaining the age of superannuation the appellant was again appointed as Director Animal Husbandry on regular basis on August 4 1965
On September 2 1967 the appellant was served with the following order The Governor of Punjab is pleased to retire Shri Mohan Singh Malhi PVSI Director Animal Husbandry Punjab Chandigarh with effect from the date of communication to him of this order on payment of three months salary and allowances in lieu of notice required by rule 532c of the Punjab Civil Service Rules Volume II
Shri Harbhajan Singh Saini Technical Expert Poultry is hereby directed to relieve Shri Mohan Singh Malhi
section section GREWAL Secretary to Government Punjab Animal Husbandry Department Chandigarh Dated the 2nd Sept 67 No 3840AHI 676213 Chandigarh dated the 2nd Sept 1967 A copy is forwarded to Shri Mohan Singh Malhi PVSI Against this order the appellant made several representations which did not evoke a favourable response
Eventually he approached the High Court on March 18 1968 by means of a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for issue of an appropriate writ quashing the aforesaid order dated September 2 1967 and declaring that he still continued to be in service
A Single Judge of the High Court allowed the appellant s petition by judgment and order dated April 22 1968 and quashed the aforesaid order retiring the appellant from service
Aggrieved by the judgment and order of the Single Judge the State of Punjab preferred a Letters Patent Appeal
The Bench hearing the appeal referred the above mentioned question for decision to a Full Bench of the Court
On 895 December 18 1969 the Full Bench by majority answered the question referred to it in the affirmative
Thereupon the appellant applied for and obtained a certificate of fitness to appeal to this Court
This is how the appeal is before us
Appearing in support of the appeal counsel for the appellant has vehemently contended that the aforesaid majority decision of the Full Bench of the High Court is erroneous as there is no provision in the Punjab Civil Service Rules like the one contained in Rule 5 of the Central Civil Services Temporary Service Rules 1949 authorising the State Government to give three months  salary in lieu of three months  notice
For a proper decision of the question it is necessary to refer to Rule 532c of the Punjab Civil Service Rules Vol
II which runs as under 532   c Vide No 1243 5FRI 641143 dated 421964 A retiring pension is also granted to a Government servant other than a class IV Government servant i Who is retired by the Appointing Authority on or after he attains the age of 55 years by giving him not less than 3 months notice ii Who retires on or after attaining the age of 55 years by giving not less than three months notice of his intention to retire to the appointing authority
Provided that where the notice is given before the age of 55 years is attained it shall be given effect to from a date not earlier than the date on which the 55 years is attained
NOTE Appointing authority retains an absolute right to retire any Government servant except a Class IV servant on or after he has attained the age of 55 years with out assigning any reason
A corresponding right is also available to such a Government servant to retire on or after he has attained the age of 55 years
 It will be noticed that the Rule as reproduced above merely provides for a contingency in which a retiring pension is to be granted to a Government servant
Assuming that the rule by implication requires three months  notice to be given to a Government servant of the description referred to therein before retiring him from service we are unable to understand how that requirement can be said to be violated if instead of three months  notice payment of three months salary and allowances is made to him
The object of the notice as well known is to give sufficient time to the Government servant whom it is intended to retire from service to find employment elsewhere and to prevent his being suddenly left in lurch without any means of livelihood
If that be the object of the notice no 896 prejudice can be said to be caused to the Government servant if in lieu of three months  notice he is given three months salary and allowances
In fact he is put in a more advantageous position by being paid three months  salary and allowances instead of notice for that period as he is thereby relieved of the obligation to spend his time in the office attending to his duty and gets all the time to himself which he can utilize in finding an alternative job or settling his affairs
Thus we are of opinion that if the appointing authority wants to exercise its right to retire a Government servant other than a Class IV Government servant who has attained the age of 55 years there is nothing to debar it from validly doing so by payment to him of a sum equivalent to the amount of his pay and allowances for the period of the notice
For the foregoing reasons we are unable to interfere with the majority view of the Full Bench of the High Court
In the result the appeal fails and is dismissed but in the circumstances of the case without any order as to costs
SR Appeal dismissed


Summary:
Under Section 532c i a retiring pension is granted to a Government Servant other than a Class IV Government servant who is retired by the Appointing Authority on or after he attains the age of 55 years by giving him not less than three months  notice
The appellant who was served with an order on September 2 1967 retiring him from service with effect from the date of communication to him of the order on payment of three months  salary and allowances in lieu of notice required by rule 532ci of the Punjab Civil Service Rules Vol
II challenged the order on the ground that the State Government was competent to retire him only with three months  notice but not with salary and allowances in lieu of the notice under the rules
The Writ Petition was accepted by a single judge and in Letters Patent Appeal by the State the Division Bench referred it to the Full Bench
The Full Bench by majority answered the question referred to it in the affirmative and in favour of the State
Dismissing the appeal by special leave the Court  HELD Rule 532 merely provides for a contingency in which a retiring pension is to be granted to a Government servant
Even assuming that the rule by implication requires three months  notice to be given to a Government servant of the description referred to therein before retiring him from service the requirement of the rule cannot be said to be violated if instead of three months  notice payment of three months salary and allowance is made
The object of the notice being to give sufficient time to the Government servant whom it is intended to retire from service to find employment elsewhere and to prevent him from his being suddenly left in lurch without any means of livelihood no prejudice can be said to be caused to the Government servant if in lieu of three months  notice he is given three months salary and allowances
In fact he is put in a more advantageous position by being paid three months  salary and allowances instead of the notice for that period as he is thereby relieved of the obligation to spend his time in the office attending to his duty and gets all the time to himself which he can utilize in finding an alternative job or setting his affairs
Therefore if the appointing authority wants to exercise its right to retire a government servant who has attained the age of 55 years there is nothing to debar it from validly doing so by payment to him of a sum equivalent to the amount of his pay and allowances for the period of notice
895 F H 896 A B