Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Akshay Bipin vs Union Of India on 22 February, 2019
Bench: A.K. Sikri, S. Abdul Nazeer
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 1396 OF 2018
AKSHAY BIPIN PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that this case is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in Gottumukkala Venkata Krishamraju vs. Union of India & Ors., AIR 2018 SC 4197, decided on 07.09.2018.
Since the petitioner has not completed 5 years of service and also not attained the age of 65 years, retiring him at the age of 62 years was clearly an illegal act on the part of the respondents contrary to the provisions of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 which is rechristened as Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993. Therefore, we set aside that order. We make the rule absolute. The petitioner Signature Not Verified shall be entitled to work till the age of 65 years Digitally signed by DEEPAK SINGH Date: 2019.02.25 15:00:05 IST Reason: or 5 years in the Debts Recovery Tribunal, whichever is earlier. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner immediately with 2 continuity of service as well as salary for the interim period.
We are informed by the learned counsel for the respondents that, before the passing of the impugned order retiring/directing him to demit the Office at the age of 62 years, a chargesheet was served upon the petitioner on 28.03.2018. However, in the writ petition filed by the petitioner in the High Court of Delhi, vide Judgment dated 25.09.2018, the said chargesheet has been quashed. Learned counsel for the respondents states that the respondents have decided to challenge the said order by filing Letters Patent Appeal. That is totally an independent action, and if the respondents so desire, they may file the Letters Patent Appeal and the order passed in this case, naturally, will have no bearing on the same.
The Writ Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
…...…................J. (A.K. SIKRI) …...…................J. (S. ABDUL NAZEER) NEW DELHI, FEBRUARY 22, 2019 3 ITEM NO.56 COURT NO.2 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 1396/2018 AKSHAY BIPIN Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) (IA 168382/2018-STAY APPLICATION) Date : 22-02-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER For Petitioner(s) Mr. P.S. Patwalia, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, Adv. Mr. Viresh B. Saharya, AOR Mr. Akshat Agarwal, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Ms. Shraddha Deshmukh, Adv.
Mr. T.M. Singh, Adv.
Ms. Chinmayee Chandra, Adv. Mr. Ankur Talwar, Adv.
Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The Writ Petition stands disposed of in terms of the signed order.
Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
(SUSHIL KUMAR RAKHEJA) (RAJINDER KAUR)
AR-CUM-PS BRANCH OFFICER
(Signed order is placed on the file.)