<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2001 (2) TMI 1045 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277666</link>
    <description>Compulsory retirement is not punishment and does not ordinarily attract Article 311; it may be ordered in public interest on the Government&#039;s subjective satisfaction after considering the entire service record, including adverse and uncommunicated entries. Judicial review is confined to mala fides, absence of material, arbitrariness, or perversity. On the stated facts, the employee had no adverse entries, had crossed the efficiency bar, was under suspension during an incomplete disciplinary enquiry, and the review committee did not recommend retirement. Because the order was passed close to superannuation on unproved allegations rather than a bona fide assessment of service utility, it was treated as punitive in effect and set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Dec 2018 12:55:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=547169" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (2) TMI 1045 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277666</link>
      <description>Compulsory retirement is not punishment and does not ordinarily attract Article 311; it may be ordered in public interest on the Government&#039;s subjective satisfaction after considering the entire service record, including adverse and uncommunicated entries. Judicial review is confined to mala fides, absence of material, arbitrariness, or perversity. On the stated facts, the employee had no adverse entries, had crossed the efficiency bar, was under suspension during an incomplete disciplinary enquiry, and the review committee did not recommend retirement. Because the order was passed close to superannuation on unproved allegations rather than a bona fide assessment of service utility, it was treated as punitive in effect and set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277666</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>