Kapoorchand vs State Of Rajasthan on 24 October, 1961
12a. It may be noted, however, that the Rules which were in force in 1958 with which period we are concerned were the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1950 which appear to us to be somewhat different from the Rules of 1958 on which the decision of this Court in Gangaram's case, ILR (1961) 11 Raj 371 (supra) was based as well as from Rule 55 of the Indian Civil Services Rules which have been referred to in Shyamlal's case, AIR 1954 SC 369, (supra) and under Rule 15(vi) of these rules, it appears that compulsory retirement before the age of superannuation amounted to a removal and was, therefore, a penalty within the meaning of that clause. Then Rule 16 provided, inter alia, that no order imposing the penalty of dismissal, removal or reduction shall be passed on a member of a service unless the procedure prescribed under that rule was complied with. According to this procedure, the member of the service concerned must have been informed in writing of the grounds on which it was proposed to take action against him and these were to be reduced in the form of a definite charge or charges and accompanied by a statement of the allegations on which each charge was based and of any other circumstances which were contemplated to be taken into consideration against him.