The Supreme Court on Wednesday set aside the compulsory retirement of an Indian Trade Service officer who was treated as “deadwood” barely two-and-a-half months after his promotion to the Joint Secretary level. [SS Das v. Union of India]

In a judgment delivered on September 9, a Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Sheel Nagu directed the Centre to pay former officer SS Das ₹9 lakh as compensation for the loss of his reputation and ₹6 lakh as costs.

Since Das has already reached the age of superannuation, the Court directed the Director General of Foreign Trade to call him back to office and accord him a farewell with full honour, as he would have received upon his regular retirement.

The Court held that the decisions to promote Das and then almost immediately treat him as “deadwood” were mutually contradictory.

“Having promoted the appellant, barely a couple of months later, the superior officers in the department could not have branded him, so to say, ‘dead wood’ to justify weeding him out in purported public interest. The two actions are mutually destructive and cannot co-exist,” it said.

Das joined the Indian Trade Service in 1989 and received several promotions during his career. He was placed in the Senior Administrative Grade at the Joint Secretary level in November 2017 and regularly promoted to the grade on February 27, 2018.

However, on May 10, 2018, the Centre compulsorily retired him under Fundamental Rule 56(j), a little less than 5 years before his superannuation. The decision was based on entries in his service record and a confidential note alleging that his handling of an anti-dumping investigation was unprofessional.

The note also recorded an oral allegation by industry representatives that Das had demanded certain favours. However, there was neither a written complaint nor any evidence supporting the allegation.

Das challenged the decision before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), which dismissed his plea in July 2021. The Delhi High Court upheld the CAT’s decision in January 2024, prompting Das to approach the Supreme Court.

After examining his service records, the Supreme Court found that Das had consistently received “outstanding” or “very good” assessments. There was also no intervening misconduct that could explain the “dramatic reversal” soon after his promotion.

The Court clarified that although a promotion does not erase earlier adverse material, a recent merit-based promotion is an objective assessment of an officer’s ability to shoulder greater responsibilities and must be given due weight.

It found that the review committee had relied on a 1998-99 entry recording complaints against Das while ignoring that the same entry said that no substance had been found in them.

“What appeared to be important to the members was that complaints were received, not that such complaints lacked substance. If this does not amount to arbitrariness, we wonder what would!” the Court remarked.

Similarly, the Court held that a 2014-15 remark stating that there was “room for improvement” could not establish doubtful integrity, particularly when Das had scored 8.75 out of 10 that year and improved his score to 9.6 the following year.

It also described the confidential note containing the unverified allegation as “not worth the paper it had been written on”.

“To brand an officer like the appellant…as dead wood and to weed him out from service by invoking the specious ground that it is necessary to do so in public interest smacks of a high degree of malice and colourable exercise of power,” the Court concluded.

The Court restored all service benefits due to Das, including a notional promotion if any junior was promoted during his period out of service. It directed that all benefits and payments be released within three months.

The Centre was also given liberty to recover the compensation and costs from the officers responsible for acting arbitrarily and in a high-handed manner.

Senior Advocate Sanjoy Ghosh and Advocates Anurag Ojha, Mrinal Singh, Tathagat Thakur and Rohan Mandal appeared for Das.

Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Anil Kaushik and Advocates Gurmeet Singh Makker, Pranjal Singh, Madhav Sinhal, Nasadiya Singh, Amit Sharma B and Anju Kaushik appeared for the Union of India.

[Read Judgment]