IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP.No. 1654 of 2008 Date of Decision : June 3, 2010. Rajinder Sharma Petitioner. Vs. H.P Tourism Development Corporation Respondent Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the petitioner Mr. Ajay Mohan Goel, Advocate. For the respondent. Mrs. Ranjana Parmar, Advocate. Dev Darshan Sud, J(Oral). The petitioner has challenged the order dated 6th September, 2008 issued by the Managing Director, Himachal Pradesh Tourism Development Corporation (Annexure P-10) ordering the compulsory retirement of the petitioner herein. The order reads as follows: “Whereas on review of the service record of Shri Rajinder Sharma, Deputy General Manager (Ad hoc) it is revealed that Sh. Rajinder Sharma is involved in many acts of omission/commission and harassment of the female employees and behavior completely unbecoming. One of the 1 Whether reports of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes episodes of Sh. Rajinder Sharma of his involvement in behaving during his posting at Himachal Bhawan, New Delhi received attention of National Press and even became a matter of Vidhan Sabha Assurance Committee. The two ACRs of Sh. Rajinder Sharma also contain very strong adverse entries about his working behaviour and acts of molestation of female employees which could not be expunged even after conveying of the same to the individual. In one of acts of his omission/commission Sh. Rajinder Sharma was found involving in allowing undue discount of Rs. 1.26 lac to a private firm during his posting at Manali, which subsequently on being pointed out, was deposited by the concerned firm. WHEREAS THE Managing Director is of the opinion that it is in the public/Corporation’s interest to do so. NOW, THEREFORE, under the provisions of HPTDC (Premature Retirement) Scheme, 1986 read with the provisions of Himachal Pradesh Civil Services (premature retirement) Rules 1976, taking into account the totality of the service record and conduct of Sh. Rajinder Sharma, Deputy General Manager, Dharamshala Complex, he on having already attained the age of fifty years, shall retire from the service of the Corporation with effect from the forenoon of the 6th September, 2008. He will be paid three months pay and allowances in liey of the notice period of three months. Sd/- Managing Director Sh. Rajinder Sharma Deputy General Manager, Dharamshala Complex, Marketing Officer, Dharamshala (H.P.) ………………………..” 2. This order, though purporting to be one which is issued in routine, assessing the working efficiency of the petitioner, is in fact punitive. This can be ascertained on a mere reading of the order and does not call for any detailed analysis. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner has referred to two judgments of the Supreme Court in Allahabad Bank Officers’ Association and another versus Allahabad Bank and others (1996) 4 Supreme Court Cases 504 and State of Gujrat versus Umedbhai M. Patel, (2001) 3 Supreme Court Cases 314 in support of his contention. He submits that where an order is punitive, which is founded on some material and not on the mere opinion of the Appointing Authority expressed in a manner to disguise it as if the order only assesses the working efficiency of the petitioner is against law unless it is passed after due enquiry in accordance with law. 3. I am not adjudicating the other allegations, which have been made against the petitioner by the respondent and counter allegations made. The two judgments cited, support the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner and I hold accordingly that this order is punitive in nature which is quashed and set aside. This petition is accordingly allowed. Annexure P-10 is quashed and set aside. All necessary consequences ensuing therein shall follow. 4. There shall be no order as to costs. (Dev Darshan Sud), Judge. June 3,2010(HL)