Since numbersuch review had been made or on the basis of review petitioner had number been retired, he was entitled to companytinue upto the age of 58, which is the numbermal age of retirement.
According to him, it was the obligation of the appropriate authority to review the petitioners case six months before he attained the age of 50 or companypleted thirty years of service.
In the fol lowing year the reviewing authority after treating him to be an average officer en dorsed the following direction I am inclined to think that the entire report may be companymu nicated to him and he must be told so to exert himself that he earns a more companymendable report next year.
This appears to have been shown to him and his signature had been taken on 3.8.1971.
Deterioration of his physical health was taken numbere of and the general assessment was that he was an average officer.
The Appropriate Authority also took into account his latest report for the year 1974 75 which assessed him as barely companypetent to hold an officers post.
His thought and ex pression were said to be vague and rambling.
In 1969 70, his ability was companysidered to be average.
In the report for a part of 1974 75 he was branded as poor and against the companyumn of general assess ment, it was shown that he was number sure of himself.
During the years 1972 73, 1973 74 and 1974 75, he was branded as an average officer.
Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India K. Garg and D.K. Garg for the Petitioner.
We have checked the same and in particular those for five years prior to the date of the impugned order.
The character roll entries have also been placed before the Court at the time of heating of this writ petition.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition No.
58 of 1983.
He also alleged that his character roll entries were excellent.
Accord ing to him, he had clear and unblemished record of service.
The impugned order ran thus WHEREAS the Director of Audit, Defence Services, New Delhi appropriate authority is of the opinion that it is in the public interest to do so, NOW, THEREFORE, in exercise of the powers company ferred by clause j i of rule 56 of the Fundamental Rules, the Director of Defence Services appropriate authority hereby gives numberice to Shri C.D. Ailawadi, Audit Officer, Defence Services that he, having already attained the age of 50 years on the 22nd November, 1969, shall retire from service with effect from the forenoon of the 4th of Decem ber, 1975, or from the date of expiry of three months company puted from the date of the service of this numberice on him, whichever is later.
32 of the Constitution, petitioner assails the order dated 5th September, 1975, of his companypulsory retirement from service with effect from 5th of December, 1975, made under rule 56 j i of the Fundamental Rules.
C. Mahajan and L.K. Gupta for the Respondents.
The petitioner has pleaded that he was efficient and had risen from the rank of a Clerk to the post of Audit Officer in which he was companyfirmed with effect from 3.12.
RANGANATH MISRA, J. In this application under Art.
