DHARAM DEV MEHTA versus THE UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

DHARAM DEV MEHTA versus THE UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

Since the appellant was appointed by the Comptroller and Auditor General, only that authority, being the highest among those specified, was competent to issue the order of compulsory retirement. The order, having been issued by the Director of Commercial Audit—a lesser authority—was illegal and contrary to law.

Parties
Appellant: Dharam Dev Mehta; Respondents: Union of India & Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
20 December 1979
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From the Judgment and Order Dated 1 11 1974 of the Delhi High Court in L.p.a. No. 19171
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Compulsory Retirement, Competent Authority, Interpretation of Service Rules

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dharam Dev Mehta

Appellant

Union of India & Others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From the Judgment and Order Dated 1 11 1974 of the Delhi High Court in L.p.a. No. 19171

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was compulsorily retired under Rule 56(j) of the Fundamental Rules by the competent authority as required by the rule.

Ratio Decidendi

Since the appellant was appointed by the Comptroller and Auditor General, only that authority, being the highest among those specified, was competent to issue the order of compulsory retirement. The order, having been issued by the Director of Commercial Audit—a lesser authority—was illegal and contrary to law.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The order of compulsory retirement is set aside as illegal.
  • The appellant will be eligible to salary and other admissible allowances for the period between the date of compulsory retirement and actual superannuation at the age of 58.