HC: Premature retirement cannot be challenged if done in public interest & with proper assessment of Employee's last 10 years service [Read Order]

The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently stated that a premature compulsory retirement is within the statutory guidelines of the state in order to regulate the efficiency in the work regime and to terminate the services of employees either if they have attained the age of 55 years or have completed their 20 years of service.

Case of the Appellant

The appellant instituted an appeal against an order dated April 1, wherein he was retired prematurely at the age of 55. His plea was dismissed earlier by a single judge bench against his premature retirement.

Observation of the Court

The Court took into consideration the statutory guidelines framed by the State which permit the premature retirement as the objective sought to be achieved by such framework is of “ providing clean administration, improving inefficiency, strengthening administrative machinery at all levels and weeding out deadwood where integrity was doubtful”

Thus Court held that as per the State regulations it is completely lawful to terminate the services of an employee, as in to retire the employee on two conditions – [a] If the employee has completed 20 years of service, [b] If the employee has attained the age of 55 years .

Moreover the Court also pointed out a precedent wherein the set proposition of law in order to ascertain the premature retirement is justified or not, the competent authority need to assess the capacity of the employee while retiring the employee prematurely, if the employee is no more fit and capable to carry the service in hand efficiently then premature retirement will be completely valid and justified under the regulations.

Observation of the Court while hearing the Appeal

However, the Bench, while hearing the appeal held a contrary view and laid emphasis on the objective test required to validate and justify the premature retirement rather than the set of conditions expressly stated under the regulations.

The Court observed that in the present case, the Appellant, Tehsildar had good conduct during the course of his employment and evidently there is no such record reflecting any such conduct which favors his premature retirement and thus the appeal was allowed.

The Court thus held that though premature retirement is permissible under the State regulations, however one cannot execute the same without proper assessment and application of mind by the competent authority and the same should be in the interest of the public and justified by the objective test laid down in the precedents - Union of India v. ME Reddy and another and Balikuntha Nath Dass and another v. Chief District Medical Officer, Mayurbhanj.

Case Details

Case Before: Punjab and Haryana High Court

Case Title: Hawa Singh Bhambhu v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Quorum:  Hon’ble Justices Daya Chaudhary and Meenakshi Mehta

Read Order@LatestLaws.com