Supreme Court: Expecting a Minor to Respond to a Public Court Notice is ‘Perverse’  ||  SC: Order 23 Rule 1 CPC Applies to S. 11 Arbitration Act, Barring Fresh Arbiration After Abandonment  ||  SC: Later Sanction Requirement Won’t Invalidate Cognizance Taken When No Prior Bar Existed  ||  SC: Documents Not Admitted by an Employee in an Enquiry Must be Proved Through Witnesses  ||  Delhi HC: MHA Has Authority to Initiate Disciplinary Proceedings Against AGMUT IAS Officers  ||  MP HC: Financial Hardship or Mere Allegations of Lawyer’s Negligence Cannot Excuse Delayed Appeal  ||  Patna HC: Blanket Approach of Denying Public Employment to Individuals Named in an FIR is Unfair  ||  Kerala HC: Repeated Possession of Even Small Quantities of Narcotic Drugs Can Invoke KAAPA  ||  Calcutta HC: Employers May Deduct Penal Rent From Gratuity of Employees Refusing to Vacate Quarters  ||  Calcutta High Court: ECI Not Singling Out Bengal, More Transfers in Other Poll-Bound States    

Policy for Non-Performing Civil Servants- (Press Information Bureau) (24 Jul 2019)

MANU/PIBU/1262/2019

Civil

The provisions of Fundamental Rules (FR) 56(j), Rule 48 of Central Civil Services (CCS) (Pension) Rules, 1972 and Rule 16(3) (Amended) of All India Services (Death-cum-Retirement Benefits) [AIS (DCRB)] Rules, 1958 lay down the policy of periodic review and premature retirement of Government servants, which is a continuous process. As per these, the Government has the absolute right to retire Government officials prematurely on the ground of lack of integrity or ineffectiveness, in public interest.

For the period July 2014-May 2019, a total of 36,756 Group-A and 82,654 Group-B officers have been reviewed under FR 56(j)/similar provisions, out of which FR 56(j)/similar provisions have been invoked/recommended against 125 Group-A and 187 Group B officers.

Tags : POLICY   NON-PERFORMING   CIVIL SERVANTS  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved