IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.5409 of 1987 Date of Decision:- 06.05.2008 Dr.Mohinder Singh ....Petitioner(s) through Mr.Sanjiv Bansal, Advocate vs. Punjab State and others ....Respondent(s) through Mr.G.S.Attariwala, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. *** CORAM:-HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. *** 1) Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2) To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3) Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? *** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) In this civil writ petition, the petitioner (who has since expired on 22.11.2002 and is represented by his legal heirs) seeks quashing of the order dated 22.5.1987 whereby he has been compulsorily retired from service. The petitioner-Dr.Mohinder Singh, joined the Health Department, Government of Punjab as a Medical Officer. He claims to have been promoted as Civil Surgeon PCMS-I and was posted as such at Sangrur on 4.3.1986 followed by his transfer to Patiala on 19.5.1986. As soon as the petitioner completed 55 years of age, he was served with the impugned order dated 22.5.1987 whereby the State Government decided to retire him compulsorily from service on expiry of three months' notice period in public interest. C.W.P. No.5409 of 1987 -2- Respondent Nos.1 and 2 have filed their written statement and in para 5 thereof, it has been categorically averred that while considering the case of the petitioner for his retention in service beyond the age of 55 years, his entire service record was examined and since it was found that the same is not upto the mark and there are adverse remarks in his Annual Confidential Reports of several years including the remarks on his integrity in the report for the year 1978-79, he has been ordered to be retired compulsorily in the public interest. As regard to the petitioner's claim that he was 'promoted' as Civil Surgeon-PCMS-I, the respondents have categorically controverted the same and have averred that the petitioner was posted as Civil Surgeon not on account of any promotion rather it was a case of mere administrative posting. It is well settled that while considering the case of an employee for retention in service beyond the age of 50/55 years, as the case may be, his entire service record is required to be looked into with more weightage to the later record. As is apparent from the details of the adverse remarks containing in several Annual Confidential Reports of the petitioner and which has been reproduced in the written statement, during the ten preceding years immediate before his retirement, the petitioner was assessed 'average' for the year 1976-77 with adverse remarks, like that he creates factionalism in the Hospital staff, did not inspire confidence and lacked initiative. He was again assessed 'average' for the year 1977-78 with such like remarks that his relations with other departments were not good and his leadership and initiative qualities were poor. For the year 1978-79, C.W.P. No.5409 of 1987 -3- the petitioner was assessed “below average” and his integrity was also doubted. The above-stated Annual Confidential Reports were duly communicated to the petitioner; he represented against these adverse remarks but upon consideration, his representations were turned down by the State Government much before ordering his compulsory retirement. It is further revealed that from 26.3.1979 to 26.5.1982 the petitioner remained under suspension, followed by his continuation on unauthorized leave with effect from 8.6.1982 to 30.3.1983. Besides this, the petitioner was charge-sheeted on 4.5.1979 and the following three charges were proved against him in a departmental enquiry:- “i) He did not hand over the charge of Cash Book and Cash etc. on his transfer from Ajnala to Baba Bakala. ii) He temporally embezzled Government money i.e. Rs.12454.91 on account of receipts of Government Civil Hospital, Ajnala. Iii) He initialed three entries in the cash Book for the month of October, 77 which were in-correct and thus he falsified the cashbook.” Thereafter vide an order dated 6.5.1982, the Government imposed upon the petitioner a punishment of stoppage of one annual increment without cumulative effect. The petitioner was again departmentally dealt with for his unauthorized absence with effect from 8.6.1982 to 30.3.1983 which culminated into imposition of punishment of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect vide Government order C.W.P. No.5409 of 1987 -4- dated 12.3.1985. That being the service record of the petitioner, the order of his compulsory retirement passed by the State Government undoubtedly falls within the “four corners of public interest” warranting no interference by this Court. Dismissed, however with no order as to costs. May 06, 2008 ( SURYA KANT ) poonam JUDGE