news details |
|
|
| HC quashes Govt order on KAS officer's premature retirement | | | Early Times Report
Srinagar, Nov 16: The state High court has quashed a government order prematurely retiring a KAS officer last year.
Before retiring him prematurely, KAS officer Mohammad Yousuf Bhat had held positions like additional DC, Anantnag, CEO of Pahalgam Development Authority and secretary, State Commission for Women.
He had challenged the legality and constitutionality of the government order No 866-GAD of June 30, before the high court.
In objections to his petition, the government stated that that order was issued to "weed out inefficient and corrupt officers from the services in public interest."
It said that as per order No 17-GAD (Vig) of May 20, 2015, the government had constituted a committee to consider for premature retirement the cases of the officers or officials, who had indulged in corruption or enjoyed bad reputation in public and had created impediments in delivery of services to the general public in a smooth and effective manner.
It said the committee noticed that Bhat, in his capacity as ADC, Anantnag, was found to have released funds to the tune of Rs 20 lakh to three BDOs of Anantnag on pick and choose basis, without ascertaining whether the electrification works were executed by them or not.
Vigilance Organization, Kashmir, (VOK), had registered a case against Bhat and GAD had accorded sanction to prosecute him. However, the order was quashed by the court.
It was observed that the Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) of the officer for the period in which FIR was registered were not available. At the same time, Bhat placed on record, photocopies of his ACRs for some of the years, which include that of 2003-2004.
"This by itself establishes that ACRs of petitioner for the years 2002-2003 and 2003-2004, during which FIR was registered, were readily available with the government and the committee. In any case, the statement made by the committee in its recommendations and the stand taken by respondents before the court in their reply in this regard is, therefore, wholly untrue," a single bench of the court comprising Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey observed in a detailed 35-page judgment.
The court observed that as the government guidelines provide itself that for any recommendations of premature retirement, the entire service record of an employee is required to be screened. "Obviously, the guidelines inherently bear the spirit of the law laid down by the Supreme Court, in that context, from time to time.
The Committee constituted by the Government under the chairmanship of the Chief Secretary, which has dealt with the case of the petitioner, is not immune from such guidelines or their mandate," the court said.
Referring to the Bhat's ACR for the year 2003-2004, the court observed "nothing adverse reported" had been remarked in his integrity column and the overall assessment reads as: "An asset for government and various organizations. Very resourceful and hardworking".
"What is astonishing is that the Committee has taken note of the fact that the sanction to prosecute the accused in FIR No 41/2003 stood quashed, yet they have proceeded to found their recommendations thereon," the court observed and finally quashed the government order of June 30, 2015.
"The respondents are directed to treat him to have continued in service till the date he attained the actual age of superannuation. Consequently, the petitioner would be entitled to and paid all the dues and service benefits for the period he has remained out of service pursuant to the impugned order till the date he actually attained his age of superannuation. It hardly needs a mention here that this will govern his retirement benefits as well. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
