West Bengal Service Rules, 1971:
Rule 75 – Interpretation of – Voluntary retirement sought – Declined on the ground that it was not appropriate in the public interest – Order declining voluntary retirement quashed by State Administrative Tribunal – In writ petition High Court upheld the order whereby prayer for voluntary retirement was declined – Review petition was allowed restoring order of the Tribunal – On appeal, held: Merely on entertaining a different view on interpretation of rule 75, it was not open to Division Bench of High Court to review previous judgment and order passed by a different Division Bench of High Court – High Court while deciding the review has committed a fundamental jurisdictional error – It has acted as if it was exercising appellate power while exercising review jurisdiction – Even in the review application no ground was raised to constitute an error apparent on the face of record – Another jurisdictional error was that the court while deciding the review petition also decided the matter on merit instead of hearing the matter afresh – Rule 75(aa) deals with retirement in public interest which brings in the concept of compulsory retirement – Rule 75(aaa) deals with voluntary retirement – Note 3 to Rule 75 (aaa) is not confined in operation to sub-rule (aaa), it is applicable to both i.e. sub-rule (aaa) and sub-rule (aa) of Rule 75 – The High Court had taken a correct view while dealing with the writ petition – High Court in review, illegally interfered with the same – Service Law – Voluntary Retirement – Review.
State of Uttar Pradesh v. Achal Singh 2018 (10) SCALE
89 – relied on.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.