1 S.B. WRIT PETITION NO.2957/2008 Managing Committee, Vs. The Non-Govt. Educational Lachoo Memorial College Tribunal, Jaipur & Ors. DATE OF ORDER : 8.5.2008 HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR Mr. R.S. Saluja, for the petitioner. **** By an order dated 17.12.2002 the respondent-employee was compulsorily retired, thus, he preferred an appeal and that came to be accepted by the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Tribunal on 5.10.2007, with a direction to reinstate him with all consequential benefits. Hence, this petition for writ is preferred. The only argument advanced by Sh. R.S. Saluja, learned counsel for the petitioner is that the back-wages could have not been granted in view of the fact that the employee despite repeated warnings was contributing nothing to the Institution. Reliance is also placed on the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in J.K. Synthetics Ltd. Vs. K.P.Aggarwal & Anr. 2007 (1) SCC (L&S) 651 and the Vice Chancellor, Banaras Hindu University Vs. Shrikant 2007 1 SCC (L&S) 327. Learned Tribunal accepted the appeal preferred by the employee on the count that he was compulsorily retired without examining the entire record and also on the count that as a matter of fact the compulsory retirement was stigmatic. It is also pertinent to note that the respondent employee was compulsorily retired only about a year earlier to the date of his actual retirement. On the day the appeal came to be accepted, due to attainment of the age of superannuation, the reinstatement of the petitioner was physically not possible. 2 In J.K. Synthetics's Case (supra) the Court was dealing with the issue where the order of reinstatement was made by substituting a penalty of dismissal from service, by a lesser punishment. The court while doing so denied for back-wages. In the instant matter, the compulsory retirement was neither made by way of penalty nor that is substituted by any lesser punishment. In the case of Vice Chancellor, Banaras Hindu University 75% back wages were awarded to the employee in peculiar facts of that case. Both the cases are having no application in the present controversy. In the present case, the Tribunal found the placement of the employee under compulsory retirement bad in eye of law on the count that before doing so the entire service record of the employee was not considered. From perusal of the document placed on record it appears that the compulsory retirement of the petitioner was made as a disciplinary measure, without holding any enquiry, though the same is termed as simplicitor. While considering such an issue, an adequate relief is required to be extended and in present case no error is committed by the Tribunal in awarding back-wages. No interference of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, therefore, is warranted. The petition for writ, therefore, is dismissed. (GOVIND MATHUR),J. Jgoyal