NEW DELHI — The Supreme Court has held that an order of compulsory retirement is neither punitive nor stigmatic in character, does not cast any aspersion on an employee's conduct and does not imply any finding of misconduct, PTI reported on Saturday. A bench of Justices Manmohan and Shree Chandrashekhar gave the ruling while upholding the Chhattisgarh government's compulsory retirement of five of its 14 reviewed employees.

Source: PTI via Swadesi News

The court was deciding appeals in Chatur Singh Dhruw v. State of Chhattisgarh (2026 INSC 1205), filed by employees of the Legal Metrology Department (Weights and Measures Department) at Raipur. The appellants had joined as Class-IV peons in 1989 and 1993, were promoted to Assistant Grade-III in 2012 and 2013, and were compulsorily retired on October 9, 2017 under a General Administration Department circular of April 25, 2017 that ordered a review of service records, Verdictum reported.

Source: Verdictum

"An order of compulsory retirement is not liable to be quashed by a Court merely on the showing that while passing it, uncommunicated adverse remarks were also taken into consideration," the bench said, relying on the settled position in Baikuntha Nath Das. It held that uncommunicated adverse entries or below-benchmark gradings in Annual Confidential Reports may be taken into account for compulsory retirement, and that neither the hearing rule (audi alteram partem) nor Article 311(2) protection applies to such an order made under the service rules.

Source: Verdictum

The bench found the Screening Committee's exercise was an objective evaluation of utility, efficiency and suitability, applied uniformly to all eligible employees without deviation. The five identified employees' recent confidential reports showed patterns of unsatisfactory performance, declining efficiency or lack of utility, while the remaining nine met the prescribed standards and were retained, PTI reported. The court also rejected the argument that other similarly placed employees had been spared.

Source: PTI via Swadesi News

The court further held that promotion does not wipe out adverse material recorded after the promotion: the principle that earlier adverse entries lose significance on promotion is confined to entries that pre-date it, and cannot neutralise entries about performance in the promoted post itself. Finding the decision rested on relevant and cogent material with no arbitrariness, mala fides or perversity shown, the bench dismissed the appeals and upheld the Chhattisgarh High Court's April 12, 2023 order affirming the retirements.

Source: Verdictum