Challenge in all these writ petitions was to the order passed by the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in short the Tribunal .
The companycerned employees were directed to be re instated with full back wages.
Again petitions were filed before the Tribunal.
The State has questioned the view expressed by the High Court that the orders passed in respect of four of the employees were number supportable in law.
In four cases, the High Court found that the orders passed were number supportable.
States writ petitions questioning companyrectness of the orders passed by the Tribunal were dismissed.
Some of the employees who were given companypulsory retirement questioned companyrectness of the orders in their respective cases by filing petitions before the Tribunal.
The High Court had also directed that in each of these cases, the companycerned employee was to be granted 50 of the amount payable as salary, allowance etc.
By order dated 29th March, 1988, the Tribunal set aside the companypulsory retirement orders, inter alia holding that the companystitution of the Screening Committee was number proper and there appear to be an apparent number application of mind because more than 550 cases were taken up for companysideration and disposed of on a single day.
However, in certain cases, the High Court found that there was numberinfirmity in the orders passed directing companypulsory retirement.
However, fresh action was permitted.
The said employees also questioned companyrectness of the High Courts orders submitting that the direction for payment of 50 of the entitlement was number justifiable as numberreasons were indicated for directing cut.
A brief reference to the factual background is necessary.
The High Court examined individual cases at the request of the parties as it was companyceded that the High Court companyld direct fresh companysideration.
Again, the orders of the Tribunal were questioned before the High Court which took up several matters for companysideration.
According to the State, in terms of the High Courts order, fresh screening was done on 03.01.2000 and orders were passed directing companypulsory retirement from an earlier date i.e. 01.10.1997 i.e. the date when the earlier orders for companypulsory retirement were passed.
While directing re instatement, the Tribunal held that the companycerned employees were entitled to the companysequential benefits.
559 employees were given companypulsory retirement by orders dated 01.10.1997.
ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. These eight appeals, four by employee, who were companypulsorily retired and four by the the State of Madhya Pradesh have that matrix in a judgment of Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur disposing of several writ petitions filed by the State of Madhya Pradesh.
By order dated 25.08.2000, the Tribunal inter alia held that the order of companypulsory retirement companyld number have been given retrospective operation.
