Allahabad High Court sets aside compulsory retirement of Deputy Superintendent of Police.


The Allahabad High Court has set aside the order dated November 17, 2019 passed by the state government by which the deputy superintendent of police Ratan Kumar Yadav was compulsorily retired from his post. Ratan was compulsorily retired in pursuance of the recommendation of the screening committee stating that in order to maintain the efficiency in state police service, the recommendation for compulsory retirement is being passed.

While quashing the order for compulsory retirement, the court directed the state government to pass order for petitioner’s joining within three weeks.


Allowing the writ petition filed by Ratan Kumar Yadav, Justice Prakash Padia observed, “It is clear that the screening committee has not recorded any subjective satisfaction and in vague term has recorded the findings that the petitioner is fit for compulsory retirement and that too without considering individual cases of the government servant. The report further established that the service record has not at all been considered by the respondent while passing the order of compulsory retirement. The order dated November 7, 2019 directing for compulsory retirement further contains the detail of earlier punishment orders. Thus, this order (November 7) casts stigma and also amount double punishment”.


“As such, the order dated November 7, 2019 passed by the state government is not sustainable, being contrary to law and is hereby quashed”, the court said in its decision dated May 6.


The petitioner was appointed on the post of sub-inspector in Uttar Pradesh police. Later, he was promoted to the post of inspector and thereafter to the post of deputy superintendent of police. The screening committee of the state government had submitted its report on November 1, 2019, wherein it had recommended that the petitioner should not be continued in service in the public interest and therefore, he has to be compulsory retired. Since the services of the petitioner was not found satisfactory by the screening committee, therefore, it recommended that the petitioner should not continue in service in public interest and he should be compulsarily retired.


Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.