Sushil Sharma Vs Union of India And Others (Supreme Court of India)
Supreme Court: ‘Washed-Off Theory’ Does Not Apply to Compulsory Retirement; Entire Service Record Can Be Considered
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of a CISF Inspector challenging his compulsory retirement under Fundamental Rule 56(j), holding that the “washed-off theory”, under which adverse entries lose significance after promotion, applies only to promotion cases and not to compulsory retirement, where the authority is entitled to consider the employee’s entire service record, while giving greater weight to the recent years’ performance.
The appellant contended that adverse entries and penalties preceding his promotion as Inspector could not be relied upon while assessing his suitability for continued service. Rejecting the contention, the Court relied on Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation v. Babu Lal Jangir and reiterated that, although old adverse entries may be treated as wiped off for the purpose of promotion, they remain relevant while deciding whether an employee should be retained in service or compulsorily retired.
The Court observed that the object of compulsory retirement is to weed out deadwood in public service and that such an order is not punitive, carries no stigma, and is based on the subjective satisfaction of the employer in public interest. Judicial review is therefore limited to examining whether the decision is mala fide, arbitrary, perverse or based on no evidence, and the courts cannot act as appellate authorities.
Examining the facts, the Court noted that although the appellant had earned promotions based on earlier good performance, his Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) for the years immediately preceding compulsory retirement reflected a clear decline in performance, with gradings falling from “Good” to “Average”, coupled with a censure and repeated warnings for negligence and lethargy after his last promotion. The Internal Screening Committee had, therefore, rightly accorded greater weight to the recent service record while also considering the appellant’s entire career.
The Supreme Court held that the Committee’s decision was consistent with settled principles governing compulsory retirement, particularly in the case of a member of the CISF, a disciplined force where consistently high standards of efficiency, vigilance and discipline are expected. Finding no arbitrariness or legal infirmity, the Court upheld the order of compulsory retirement and dismissed the appeal.
Cases Discussed
- Central Industrial Security Force v. HC (GD) Om Prakash (SC)
- Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and Others v. Babu Lal Jangir (SC)
- Ram Murti Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another (SC)
- Pyare Mohan Lal v. State of Jharkhand (SC), (2010) 10 SCC 693 : (2011) 1 SCC (L&S) 550
- Posts and Telegraphs Board and Others v. C.S.N. Murthy (SC)
- Baikuntha Nath Das and Another v. Chief District Medical Officer, Baripada and Another (SC)
FULL TEXT OF THE SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT/ORDER
