Compulsion retirement rule in India

Compulsory retirement is on the ground that his services are no longer required in future. Dismissal etc. are on the ground that the past misconduct has been such as to merit punishment. Punishment is a positive order taking away something whereas compulsory retirement is a negative order refusing to do something in future. The idea that on account of some misconduct, inefficiency, etc. the servant must be punished does not exist when he is compulsorily retired. The idea behind compulsory retirement is that the State will not find his services useful after the date fixed for his retirement and it is not the idea to punish him for something done by him prior to that date. While punishing, the State looks to the past, while compulsorily retiring, it looks to the future, that his services will not be found useful. The ground that the servant has outlived his utility is not finding any fault with him while he is in service. Compulsory retirement under the rule does not amount to punishment. The compulsory retirement is one of the facets of the doctrine of pleasure incorporated in Article 310 of the Constitution and it does not involve any stigma or punishment. The assessment by superior officer shows that he was an average officer and sometimes he was reckless, impolite and suffered from' other infirmities.