WA 43(SH)/2010 - Gauhati High Court

6
Annexure-H to the writ petition, the learned Advocate,
Mr.Bhattacharjee has argued that the appellant was upgraded
to medical category SHAPE-1 w.e.f.4 th December, 2001 and
therefore the decision of the respondents in placing the
appellant in compulsory retirement on that ground was
uncalled for. The learned CGC has submitted that the
appellant petitioner was categorised as low medical category
from the year,1994 and therefore, the decision taken by the
appropriate authority was justified. The documents so
annexed shows that the appellant petitioner was categorised
thus:-
“P3(T-24) with effect from 26.09.1994
P2(T-24) with effect from 15.04.1995
P2(T-24) with effect from 16.10.1995
P2(Permanent ) with effect from 16.04.1996
P2(T-24) with effect from 16.04.1998”
In view of above categorisation, learned CGC has
submitted that the appellant petitioner was never wrongly
categorised with malafide intention and that the other
materials which is considered by appropriate authority as
detailed in para-19 of the affidavit-in-opposition were also
rightly considered for which interference in the decision of the
appropriate authority is not called for by this Court.
Learned Single Judge while considering the rival
contention on the issue, in para-7,8 and 9 of judgment and
order dated 29.7.2010 held as thus:-
“ 7. Having regard to the rival contention of the
learned counsels and also upon consideration of the
pleadings as well as the original ACR records
produced before the Court, it appears that adverse
remarks on the integrity of the petitioner have been
recorded by his superiors and such remarks have