https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289782 Enhancement of the superannuation age of subordinate judicial officers to 60 years was treated as a conditional, ad hoc benefit rather than an automatic extension of service. Continuation beyond the normal retirement age depended on a bona fide High Court assessment of the officer's past record, integrity, quality of work, and suitability for further useful service. The expression "compulsory retirement" in this context was not disciplinary in nature. Where the officer's record contained adverse material and the evaluation committee, after review, found no potential for continued useful service, refusal of the extended benefit was not arbitrary or unsupported by material. en-us Fri, 15 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Aug 2020 12:27:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289782 Enhancement of the superannuation age of subordinate judicial officers to 60 years was treated as a conditional, ad hoc benefit rather than an automatic extension of service. Continuation beyond the normal retirement age depended on a bona fide High Court assessment of the officer's past record, integrity, quality of work, and suitability for further useful service. The expression "compulsory retirement" in this context was not disciplinary in nature. Where the officer's record contained adverse material and the evaluation committee, after review, found no potential for continued useful service, refusal of the extended benefit was not arbitrary or unsupported by material. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 15 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289782