Supreme Court - Daily Orders
S Nagarajan vs State Of Tamilnadu on 12 May, 2015
Bench: Dipak Misra, Prafulla C. Pant
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO.6994 OF 2013
S. Nagarajan … Appellant
VERSUS
State of Tamil Nadu & Anr. … Respondents
O R D E R
Heard Mr. Gopal Subramaniam, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Mohan Parasaran, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent no.2.
Regard being had to the limited prayer made by Mr. Subramaniam, learned senior counsel, the facts in detail need not be stated. Suffice it to mention that the appellant was serving in the superior judiciary of Tamil Nadu Judicial Service and he was compulsorily retired vide order dated 31.08.2011. Aggrieved by the said order of compulsory retirement, the appellant invoked the jurisdiction of the High Court of Judicature at Madras in W.P. Signature Not Verified No.25995 of 2011 whereby the High Court, while expressing its Digitally signed by Gulshan Kumar Arora Date: 2015.05.27 16:07:01 IST opinion Reason: as regards the declination, has expressed at various places 'pending vigilance enquiries' and 'honesty and integrity' 2 of the appellant.
It is submitted by Mr. Subramaniam, learned senior counsel that he does not intend to assail the order of compulsory retirement as the High Court has taken the stand that there was overall assessment of the service records, though some of them were not communicated to him. It is submitted by him that there has been no record questioning his integrity and honesty or any enquiry pending against him but definitely the employer has the authority to compulsorily retire him on other grounds.
Mr. Mohan Parasaran, learned senior counsel appearing for the High Court, we must appreciably state, submitted that the records do not reflect any kind of dishonesty or lack of integrity on the part of the appellant and, in fact, he was compulsorily retired on overall assessment of his ACRs.
In view of the aforesaid, while not interfering with the order of compulsory retirement, we expunge the remarks made against the appellant which, according to us, were absolutely unwarranted. As we have expunged the remarks made against the appellant in the judgment with regard to his honesty and integrity or any remarks that is suggestive of honesty or integrity, needless to say, he can get all the benefits that an officer can because the order of compulsory retirement of the present nature is not a punishment. We may hasten to clarify that no stigma is attached to him.
Resultantly, with the aforesaid modification in the order of 3 the High Court, the appeal stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
.....................,J.
(Dipak Misra) .....................,J.
(Prafulla C. Pant) New Delhi;
May 12, 2015.
ITEM NO.120 COURT NO.5 SECTION XII
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Civil Appeal No(s). 6994/2013
S NAGARAJAN Appellant(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF TAMILNADU AND ANR Respondent(s)
(With appln.(s) for early hearing and office report) Date : 12/05/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAFULLA C. PANT For Appellant(s) Mr. Gopal Subramanium, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Liz Mathew, AOR Mr. M.F. Philip, Adv.
Ms. Malavika Prasad, Adv.
Mr. Aditya Sharma, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Subaramoniam Prasad, AAG Mr. B. Balaji, AOR Mr. Rakesh Sharm, Adv.
Mr. Mohan Parasaran, Sr. Adv.
Mr. V. Balachandran, AOR Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The appeal stands disposed of in terms of the signed order.
(Gulshan Kumar Arora) (H.S. Parasher)
Court Master Court Master
(Signed order is placed on the file)