Plea To Substitute Order Of 'Compulsory' Retirement With 'Voluntary' Doesn't Require Adjudication On Merits: Madras HC Grants Relief To Retd Judge

The Madras High Court recently allowed the plea filed by a former District Judge seeking to amend an order for compulsory retirement as that of voluntary retirement. The bench of Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice N Mala observed that the issue did not require adjudication on merits. The court observed as below:We do not find the prayer of the petitioner of such nature which cannot be considered or accepted. The prayer is to accept the application for voluntary retirement from the date he was given compulsory retirement. It is not in dispute that the retiral benefits arising out of the compulsory retirement or voluntary retirement would be the same and the petitioner is not claiming any additional benefits. In view of the above and looking at the facts of the case and as an exception, the prayer of the petitioner to substitute the order of compulsory retirement to that of voluntary retirement is accepted. The petitioner would be treated to have voluntarily retired from the date of the order of compulsory retirement.In the present case, the petitioner was subjected to an order of compulsory retirement as per the decision of the Administrative Committee, upon attaining the age of 55 years and on the basis of only one remark of "below average". This decision was confirmed by the Full Court. A day after the decision was confirmed by the Full Court, the petitioner made an application for voluntary retirement. The same was not accepted by the then Chief Justice as it would be going against the resolution of the Full Court.Senior Advocate ARL Sunderesan for Advocate KM Mrithunjayan submitted that the order for compulsory retirement is a stigma given its nature and application in general. In any case, the petitioner does not intend to challenge the order but is asking to substitute the order of compulsory retirement with the order of voluntary retirement. The petitioner sent representations to permit him to voluntarily retire before issuing of the order impugned hereinCountering the arguments of the Petitioner, the Respondent Government pleader submitted that, there is no stigma attached to compulsory retirement and that the Supreme Court has reiterated the same on several occasions. Further, it was submitted by the Government Pleader that the decision to compulsorily retire from service was made only after Full Court's consideration.The court noticed that the order of compulsory retirement was not being challenged and the prayer was limited to substituting the order of compulsory retirement with the order of voluntary retirement. As this prayer did not require any adjudication of merits, the court allowed the application.Case Title: Mohamed Jiyaputheen v. State of Tamil Nadu and AnotherCase No: WP No. 8852 of 2022Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 270Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan Senior Counsel for Mr. K. M. MrithunjayanCounsel for the Respondents: Mr.P.Muthukumar State Govt Pleader (R1) and Mr.M.Santhanaraman (R2)Click here to read/download the judgment

Plea To Substitute Order Of 'Compulsory' Retirement With 'Voluntary' Doesn't Require Adjudication On Merits: Madras HC Grants Relief To Retd Judge

Upasana Sajeev

Tags