In the order of companypulsory retirement, it was stated that the case relating to companytinuance of the respondent in Govt.
While the respondent was companytinuing under suspension, the Govt.
service beyond the age of 50 and 55 years was reviewed.
of Gujarat passed an order of companypulsory retirement by invoking Clause aa i 1 of Rule 161 1 of the Bombay Civil Services Rules, 1959, with effect from 13.2.1987.
An enquiry was initiated against him alleging that he had companymitted acts of misuse of power in companynection with the purchase of Tarpauline.
The respondent challenged the order of his companypulsory retirement before the High Court of Gujarat and by the impugned judgment, the Division Bench of the High Court set aside that order on the ground that the same was punitive in nature and was passed with an oblique purpose to punish the respondent for the charges which were neither investigated number had the respondent been given reasonable opportunity of hearing.
LITTTTTTJ G. BALAKRISHNAN, J. Leave granted.
The respondent was due to retire on superannuation by the end of August 1988, his date of birth being 17.8.1930.
The respondent, during the relevant time, was an Executive Engineer working in the Narmada Development Department of the State of Gujarat.
He was placed under suspension on 22.5.1986 pending disciplinary proceedings.
