VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

324 DECISION - 92
is not in terms made a condition for the exercise of the power. In
other words, a compulsory retirement has no stigma or implication of
misbehaviour or incapacity. In the present case, there is not only no
question of implication, but a clear statement appears on the face of
the order that the respondent had outlived his utility. The order clearly
attaches a stigma to him and any person who reads the order would
immediately consider that there is something wrong with him or his
capacity to work. The Supreme Court held that the compulsory
retirement is by way of punishment and that the order amounts to
removal within the meaning of Art. 311(2) of Constitution.
(92)
Misconduct — in quasi-judicial functions
Government competent to take action even in
respect of misconduct which falls outside the
discharge of duties as Government servant, if it
reflects on his reputation for good faith, integrity or
devotion to duty. What was challenged is not the
correctness or legality of the decision but the
conduct behind it.
S. Govinda Menon vs. Union of India,
AIR 1967 SC 1274
The appellant, an I.A.S. Officer, was First Member of the
Board of Revenue, Kerala and was holding the post of Commissioner
of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments. As Commissioner,
he was charged with acting in disregard of the provisions of section
29 of Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act by
sanctioning lease of immovable property without any auction.
Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him by the State
Government under All India Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules,
1957. The Inquiry Officer, after conducting the inquiry, found him
guilty of certain charges. The Union of India after consideration of