RAJESH GUPTA versus STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND OTHERS

Citation: [2013] 1 S.C.R. 557 · Decided: 23-01-2013 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.S. NIJJAR, ANIL R. DAVE · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2013] 1 S.C.R. 557 
RAJESH GUPTA 
v. 
STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND OTHERS 
(Civil Appeal No. 952 of 2013) 
·JANUARY 23, 2013 
[SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR AND ANIL R. DAVE, JJ.) 
A 
B 
Service Law - Retirement - Premature retirement -
Jammu and Kashmir Public Service Commission -
Appellant, an Executive Engineer in the Rural Engineering c 
Wing ('REW') -
Allegation that he possessed assets 
disproportionate to his known sources of income and that he 
had issued back dated technical sanctions to some 
departmental works and passed bills and estimates in respect 
thereof - High Powered Review Committee constituted by 0 
State Government to consider cases of officers/officials for 
premature retirement in terms of Articles 226(2) and 226(3) 
of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services Regulations -
Based upon the recommendations made by the .said 
Committee, order passed by respondent-State Government 
E 
prematurely retiring the appellant from service - Writ petition 
filed by appellant - Dismissed by Single Judge of High Court 
- Division Bench affirmed the order - On appeal, held: 
Recommendation made by the High Powered Review 
Committee was indubitably arbitrary - There was no material 
F 
before the Committee to conclude that appellant possessed 
assets beyond his known source of income - In regard to 
a/legation with regard to issuance of back dated technical 
sanctions, at best the appellant acted in a casual and 
haphazard manner in the maintenance of records - Such 
negligence on the part of appellant cannot per se lead to the 
G 
conclusion that the appellant was acting in such a manner with 
an ulterior motive - Conclusions reached by High Powered 
Committee also did not co-relate to the assessment of work 
557 
H 
558 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2013] 1 S.C.R. 
A and integrity of the appellant in the annual performance report 
- In all annual performance reports, the appellant was rated 
'very good', 'excellent' and even 'outstanding' - Order passed 
by the State Government suffered from vice of arbitrariness 
- Impugned order of premature retirement of the appellant 
8 quashed and set aside - Since appellant still not reached the 
age of superannuation, direction given for his reinstatement 
- However, as appellant had not challenged the order of 
premature retirement on the ground that the action taken by 
the Government was malafide, it would not be appropriate in 
C this case, to follow the normal rule of grant of full backwages 
on reinstatement - Direction given that the appellant shall be 
paid 30% of the backwages from the date of order of 
premature retirement till reinstatement - He shall not be 
entitled to any interest on the backwages -
Upon 
reinstatement, it shall be open to the Government to post the 
D appellant on a non- sensitive post in view of the background 
of the case -
Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services 
Regulations, 1956 - Article 226(2) and 226(3). 
Baikuntha Nath Das & Anr. vs. Chief District Medical 
E Officer, Baripada & Anr. (1992) 2 SCC 299: 1992 (1) SCR 
836; Nand Kumar Verma v. State of Jharkhand and others 
2012 (3) SCC 580; State of Gujarat v. Umedbhai M. Patel 
2001 (3) SCC 314: 2001 (2) SCR 170 and Jugal Chandra 
Saikia vs. State of Assam & Anr. (2003) 4 SCC 59: 2003 (2) 
F SCR 615 and Allahabad Bank Officers' Association & Anr. vs. 
Allahabad Bank & Ors. (1996) 4 SCC 504: 1996 (2) Suppl. 
SCR 172- referred to. 
G 
2012 (3) sec 580 
2001 (2) SCR 170 
2003 (2) SCR 615 
Case Law Reference: 
referred to 
referred to 
referred to 
H 
1996 (2) Suppl. SCR 172 referred to 
Paras 15, 20 
Paras 15, 21 
Paras 17, 22 
Paras 18, 24 
RAJESH GUPTA v. STATE OF JAMMU AND 
559 
KASHMIR 
1992 (1) SCR 836 
referred to 
Paras 18, 20 
A 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 952 
of 2013. 
From the Judgment & Order dated 28.02.2011 of the High 
Court of Jammu and Kashmir at Jammu in LPA (SW) No. 20 
B 
of 2008. 
Dinesh Kumar Garg, B.S. Billowaria, Dr. Bheem Pratap 
Singh, Jyoty for the Appellant. 
c 
Sunil Fernandes, Vernika Tomar, Rahul Sharma, Astha 
Sharma, lnsha Mir for the Respondent. 
The following order of the Court was delivered 
ORDER 
D 
1. Leave granted. 
2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 
3. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order 
E 
of the Division Bench dated 28th February, 2011 passed by 
the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir at Jammu in L.P.A.(SW) 
No. 20 of 2008 whereby ttie Division Bench confirmed the 
judgment and order passed by the learned S
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.