Dismissing the petition challenging the compulsory retirement of former judicial officer Ashok Kumar Agarwal. the court said that there is no scope for interference in to compulsory retirement given to a judicial officer for being inefficient and not meeting the required standards to discharge the duty of the post held by him.
According to the case, Ashok Kumar Agarwal had joined the Odisha judicial service on November 17,1997. Ashok Kumar Agarwal was an officer in the Cadre of civil judge, judicial magistrate first class,Motu.when he was given compulsory retirement at the age of 50 on August 23, 2012. Agarwal filed the petition challenging the order on September 30,2014.
The Bench of chief Justice S. Muralidharan and Justice B. P. Routray said that on an overall assessment of the personal records of the petitioner it was found out that the emerging picture was not favourable to the petitioner During his service career spanning 14.8 years,he was not able to get a good grading for at least three consecutive years.
The Court observed that petitioner was not found suitable either for promotion to the higher post or for a pay hike.Petitioner performance was often rated average and there have been allegations of his passing indiscriminate uniformity or consistency in passing judicial orders.charges in this regard were also framed against him in the departmental proceedings. The overall assessment of the petitioner's entire service career is that his performance failed to meet the expected standards of competency. The Court said,An overall consideration of all these factors, tested on the touchstone of the standard of efficiency of the petitioner as a judicial officer reveals that the decision of authority can not be said to be as malafide, arbitary or based on no evidence.considering the scope of interference in such matter involving compulsory retirement,we do not find any reason to interfere
