Rameshwar Dayal Vs. Union of India & Ors.
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal No. 1919 of 1981.
Petitioner: Rameshwar Dayal
Respondent: Union of India & Ors.
Apeal: Civil Appeal No. 1919 of 1981.
Judges: RANGANATH MISRA & G.L. OZA, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Nov 26, 1987
Head Note:
CIVIL SERVICE
Compulsory retirement – Appellant keeping away from the disciplinary proceeding was without justification – Yet notice should be taken of the finding of the Dy.Registrar of Co-operative Societies who enquired into the claim and held in favour of the appellant – Appellant awarded compensation of his claims.
JUDGEMENT:
O R D E R
1. We have heard counsel for both sides. We are not satisfied that the appellant had any justification to keep away from participating in the disciplinary proceeding. Yet, notice should be taken of the findings reached by the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies who enquired into the claim and came to a judicial conclusion in favour of the appellant. The appellant was visited with the punishment of compulsory retirement in the disciplinary action as far back as on 1.7.71. If he had not been compulsorily retired, he would have been in service till about 1982. Now that the appellant has retired, the only question for consideration in the appeal would be as to whether he should be compensated.
2. Bearing the facts of the case in view, we are of the opinion that a consolidated sum of Rs.25,000/- should be given to the appellant by the respondents in full satisfaction of all his claims. We direct the amount to be paid to the appellant within three months hence.
1. We have heard counsel for both sides. We are not satisfied that the appellant had any justification to keep away from participating in the disciplinary proceeding. Yet, notice should be taken of the findings reached by the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies who enquired into the claim and came to a judicial conclusion in favour of the appellant. The appellant was visited with the punishment of compulsory retirement in the disciplinary action as far back as on 1.7.71. If he had not been compulsorily retired, he would have been in service till about 1982. Now that the appellant has retired, the only question for consideration in the appeal would be as to whether he should be compensated.
2. Bearing the facts of the case in view, we are of the opinion that a consolidated sum of Rs.25,000/- should be given to the appellant by the respondents in full satisfaction of all his claims. We direct the amount to be paid to the appellant within three months hence.
