M.K. Hanjura JUDGMENT
M.K. Hanjura, J.
1. The entire gamut of the controversy raised here in this petition revolves round the plea whether the Order bearing No. 480-GAD of 2005 dated 26th April 2005, issued by the Government of Jammu and Kashmir, in exercise of powers conferred by Article 226(2) of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services Regulations, whereby notice was given to the petitioner, namely, Gautam Singh (Junior Assistant) Sales Man, Consumer Affairs and Public Distribution Department, Ligri/Tun Tehsil Kishtwar, to the effect that he having already attained 48 years of age, shall retire from service with effect from the forenoon of the 26th of April 2005, can withstand the test of judicial scrutiny.
2. The pith and core of the petition of the petitioner is that during the entire tenure of his service, he worked with great deal of honesty and dedication at different places of posting and, at the relevant point of time, i.e. the day when the Order aforesaid was issued, he was holding the post of (Junior Assistant) Sales Man, Consumer Affairs and Public Distribution Department, Ligri/Tun, Tehsil Kishtwar. His past Service career has remained unblemished and, all along, he has been given various promotions on the basis of his suitability, merit and excellent service record. It is averred that he was initially appointed as Chowkidar in the respondent department in the year 1975 and thereafter he was promoted to the post of Junior Assistant in the year 1981. He was also granted the Time Bound Promotion vide Order No. 66-FSJ of 2000 dated 6th July 2000 and his seniority was also finalised vide Circular dated 2nd April 2004 issued by the respondent No. 2. No recovery has to be made from the petitioner and the annual physical verification of the Sale Depot conducted by Assistant Director, Consumer Affairs & Public Distribution, is up to date. No shortage of goods on the part of the petitioner either at the last place of his posting, which is Tun (Paddar) Tehsil Kishtwar, District Doda, or other places of his posting has been found. It is pleaded that the petitioner was working to the entire satisfaction of the superior officers as well as the general public of the area (Tun, Paddar) when he was served with the impugned order dated 26th April 2005, whereby the petitioner was retired from service after he having attained 48 years of age with effect from the Forenoon of 26th April 2005.
3. Further submission of the petitioner is that he was given to understand that the only reason for passing of such an order without any complaint or allegation against the petitioner, was that the petitioner was transferred to Food Store, Gulabgarh from Sale Depot, Ligri vide office order No. 07-FSJ of 2002 dated 7th February 2002 and as per this order the petitioner joined at his new place of posting on 15th February 2002 and another order dated 19th February 2002 was issued by Assistant Director, Food & Supplies, Doda, on the telephonic directions of the respondent No. 2, whereby the order of transfer of the petitioner to Food Store, Gulab Garh, was kept in abeyance. Since the petitioner stood relieved from Sale Depot, Ligri and he had joined Food Store, Gulab Garh, in terms of the order dated 7th February 2002, he was left with no other option but to challenge the same before this Court in a writ petition, diarised and registered as SWP No. 1698/2002, which was disposed of vide order dated 14th June 2002, with a direction that as order dated 7th February 2002 has been directed to be kept in abeyance, the petitioner would be permitted to join at the original place of posting. In case the petitioner reports back, he would be permitted to join and the responsibility to pay the salary after that would be on the person who fails to permit him to join the duty. The aforesaid order dated 14th June 2002, is stated to have not been implemented by the respondent No. 2, forcing the petitioner to file another writ petition, being SWP No. 2139/2002, which was disposed of vide order dated 19th August 2002, with a direction to the respondents to take notice of the anomaly pointed out by the petitioner in the said writ petition and take a decision within a period of 15 days from the date of the receipt of the ........