Supreme Court orders Centre to pay ₹15 lakh to illegally retired officer

The Supreme Court is determining whether the power to compulsorily retire under Fundamental Rule 56(j) was exercised rationally and based on sufficient material.

Who it concerns: Appellant: S.S. Das (former Indian Trade Service officer); Respondent: Union of India; Bench: Justice Dipankar Datta.

What the court decided

• The Court is reviewing the legality of the compulsory retirement order dated 10th May 2018 issued under Fundamental Rule 56(j).
• The Court is examining whether there is a rational nexus between the material relied upon and the conclusion that compulsory retirement was in the public interest.
• The Court is assessing the validity of the High Court and CAT judgments that upheld the retirement order.

Also in the document

• The appellant was retired less than five years before his date of superannuation.
• The High Court noted that the Review Committee was required to be headed by the Secretary of the concerned Ministry, but the Secretary was not part of the committee.
• The High Court relied on a confidential note and adverse entries in Annual Performance Appraisal Reports (specifically the 2014-2015 APAR) as relevant material for the decision.
• The High Court held that the appellant's subsequent promotion to Joint Secretary did not invalidate the compulsory retirement order, as promotion and retirement operate in distinct fields.