S. RAMACHANDRA RAJU versus STATE OF ORISSA

Citation: [1994] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 828 · Decided: 31-08-1994 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY, N. VENKATACHALA

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
S. RAMACHANDRA RAJU 
v. 
STATE OF ORISSA 
AUGUST 31, 1994 
f , 
B 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND N. VENKATACHALA, JJ.] 
Service Law 
Orissa Service Code: Rule 7l(a). 
c 
Compulsory Retirement-Government should exercise the power only 
in public interat-Entire service record of employee should be con-
sidered-Where the order was passed without considering the entire record 
and was based on solitary adverse remarks it was held to be arbitrary exercise 
of Powei--Order held illegal and qu•~hed. 
D 
Conjident1'al Repo~eporting Officer-Duty of-Reporting Officer 
should eschew his subjectivity and personal prejudice or proclivity and make 
objective assessrnent. 
The appellant, a Lecturer in a Government College, was given adverse 
E comments for the year 1987-88. His service record earlier and later .to 
1987 ·88 was meritorious. He mad•: a representation for expunging the 
adverse remarks alleging that remarks were made due to ma/a jides and 
personal vendatta by the Principal. In the meanwhile, he was promoted as • 
Reader. However, by proceedings dated May 28, 1991 he was compulsorily 
F 
retired from service under Rule 71(") or the Orissa Service Code. The sole 
foundation for the exercise of the power of retiring the appellant from 
service was the adverse remarks foic 1987-88 and the recommendation of 
the Review Committee which also relied on the said adverse remarks only. 
His representation for expunging th1e remarks was rejected. The appellant 
unsuccessfully challenged the order of compulsory retirement before the 
G Administrative 'fribunal. 
Io appeal to this Court it was contended on behalf of the appellant 
that the Tribunal erred in its cooclu'iioo because appellant's entire service 
,,,,. _ 
record was not ~oosldered and the order was based only on the Report of 
the Review Committee which was founded only upon the adverse remarks 
H of the Principal for one particular yi:ar. 
828 
t 
. ...., 
S.R. RAJUv. STATE OF ORISSA 
829 
Allowing the appeal and setting aside the order of compulsory A 
retirement, this Court 
HELD : 1. The exercise of power by the government falls in the 
category of arbitrary exercise of power or failure to take the total record 
of service into consideration objectively as only the solitary adverse ~eport B 
for the year 1987-88 has been taken as a foundation to compulsorily retire 
the appellant from service. The Review Committee as well considered only 
that report; neither earlier reports nor subsequent reports were con-
sidered. The appellant was promoted as a Reader after the adverse _report 
and the adverse comments were communicated to him and in a mechanical 
way they rejected the representation to expunge the adverse remarks, even C 
without going into the contention of the appellant that the then Principal 
was actuated with ma/a fides by submitting wrongly or falsely in confiden· 
tial report which appear to have some foundation or suspicion, for such a 
consistent record earlier and later periods would establish· that the appel· 
lant bas meritorious record of service as a teacher. Therefore, in that D 
background the exercise of the power is illegal. (838-G-H, 839-A, BJ 
2. Though the order of compulsory retirement is not a punishment 
and the government employee is entitled to draw all retiral benefits includ-
ing pension, the government must exercise its power only in the public 
interest to effectuate the efficiency of the services. The entire service record E 
or character rolls or confidential reports maintained would furnish the 
back drop material for consideration by the Government or the Review 
Committee or the appropriate authority. On consideration of the totality 
of the facts and circumstances alone, the government should form the 
opinion .that the government officer needs to be compulsorily retired from F 
service. Therefore, the entire service record, more particularly the latest, 
would form the foundation for the opinion and furnish the base to exercise 
the power under the relevant rule to compulsorily retire a government 
officer. (837-G, 838-B, CJ 
3. The dead wood need to be removed to augment efficiency. Integrity G 
in public service need to be maintained. The exercise of power of compul-
sory retirement must not be a haunt on public servant but must act as a 
check and reasonable measure to ensure efficiency of service and free from 
corruption and incompetence. The officer would live by reputation built 
around him. In an appropriate case, there may 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.