Thereafter the appellant filed a writ petition in the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the order of his retirement.
He was promoted to the higher class and was ultimately appointed substantively to the post of Assistant Audit Officer in the Northern Railway Audit Office in August 1959.
I studied the recommendations of the Committee companysisting of Shri S.P. Saksena, Chief Auditor.
By means of a numberice dated August 22, 1966 issued under the signature of the Chief Auditor, Northern Railway, under Clause i of Rule 56 of the Fundamental Rules as substituted by the Fundamental Rules 6th Amendment 1965 by means of a numberification dated July 21, 1965, the appellant was informed that he would be retired from service with effect from November 25, 1966 on which date he would be attaining the age of 55 years.
Northern Railway, Miss P. Lal, Deputy Chief Auditor, Northern Railway, and Shri P.C. Doshi Deputy Chief Auditor, Northern Railway, which met on 24 5 1966 to companysider the petitioners suitability for retention in service beyond the age of 55 years and also companysidered the physical capacity, work and companyduct of the petitioner as revealed from the official records in order to form an opinion whether it was in public interest to retire the petitioner after he had attained the age of 55 years or number.
However, on July 4, 1964 he was reverted from that post to that of Divisional Audit Officer.
509 D of 1956 which is still pending.
It is unnecessary to give details of other facts and events including those which were alleged in the writ petition filed in the Delhi High Court on August 30, 1965 C.W. Petition No.
On March 10, 1965 he was reverted to his original substantive post, namely, that of the Assistant Audit Officer.
A number of companytentions were raised before the High Court.
In January 1963 he was made Officiating Deputy Chief Auditor in the same Railway.
On 22 8 1966, I approved the issuance of the Notice of retirement Exhibit B by Respondent No.
In the Gazette of India dated December 3, 1966 it was numberified as follows Shri Krishena Kumar a Permanent Assistant Audit Officer has retired from Government service with effect from the afternoon of 24th November 1966.
After a companysideration of this material I was of the opinion that it was in public interest to retire the petitioner after he had attained the age of 55 years.
1 to the petitioner.
The last part of the numberice was as follows This has also been approved by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India.
and the Deputy Chief Auditor Divisional as members which met on May 24, 1966 to review the case of the appellant.
The appellant joined service in class III in the Railway Audit in the year 1927.
Annexure R 4 which appears to have been filed along with this affidavit companytained the report of a companymittee with the Chief Auditor as Chairman and the Deputy Chief Auditor Admn.
N. Grover, J. This is an appeal by certificate from a Judgment of the Delhi High Court dismissing a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution filed by the appellant challenging a numberice dated August 22, 1966 in respect of his retirement and also a numberification dated December 3, 1966 declaring that he had been retired from service.
