https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169729 The Supreme Court explained that the compulsory retirement rule in Article 465-A of the Civil Service Regulations, read with Note I, was binding on an employee who entered service after the relevant pension rules had already come into force and had been validated by the 1919 legislation. It further stated that compulsory retirement is not dismissal or removal for Article 311 purposes because it is a non-punitive measure based on qualifying service and public interest, carries no stigma, and does not forfeit accrued pensionary benefits. On that basis, no further show-cause opportunity was required and the compulsory retirement order stood upheld. en-us Tue, 30 Mar 1954 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 May 2015 10:18:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169729 The Supreme Court explained that the compulsory retirement rule in Article 465-A of the Civil Service Regulations, read with Note I, was binding on an employee who entered service after the relevant pension rules had already come into force and had been validated by the 1919 legislation. It further stated that compulsory retirement is not dismissal or removal for Article 311 purposes because it is a non-punitive measure based on qualifying service and public interest, carries no stigma, and does not forfeit accrued pensionary benefits. On that basis, no further show-cause opportunity was required and the compulsory retirement order stood upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 30 Mar 1954 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169729