Does the washed-off theory apply automatically in cases of compulsory retirement under FR 56(j)?

Paragraph 40Moving further, we observe that another coordinate Bench in Rajasthan SRTC v. Babu Lal Jangir[^27] was of the following opinion: 23. … this “washed-off theory” will have no application when the case of an employee is being assessed to determine whether he is fit to be retained in service or requires to be given compulsory retirement. The rationale given is that since such an assessment is based on “entire service record”, there is no question of not taking into consideration the earlier old adverse entries or record of the old period. We may hasten to add that while such a record can be taken into consideration, at the same time, the service record of the immediate past period will have to be given due credence and weightage. For example, as against some very old adverse entries where the immediate past record shows exemplary performance, ignoring such a record of recent past and acting only on the basis of old adverse entries, to retire a person will be a clear example of arbitrary exercise of power. However, if old record pertains to integrity of a person then that may be sufficient to justify the order of premature retirement of the government servant. (emphasis ours)

Paragraph 43Learned ASG submitted, on the anvil of the rulings in Pyare Mohan Lal v. State of Jharkhand[^29] and Central Industrial Security Force v. Om Prakash[^30] that the “washed-off” theory does not automatically apply in cases of compulsory retirement and that the entire service record may be considered even subsequent to promotion. This proposition is unexceptionable. However, there is a difference between saying that earlier material may be considered and saying that earlier isolated materials must necessarily yield to a consistent and long- standing stellar record. The following passage from Pyare Mohan Lal (supra), as relied upon by the respondents, illumines the position as thus: 24. In view of the above, the law can be summarised to state that in case there is a conflict between two or more judgments of this Court, the judgment of the larger Bench is to be followed. More so, the washed-off theory does not have universal application. It may have relevance while considering the case of government servant for further promotion but not in a case where the employee is being assessed by the reviewing authority to determine whether he is fit to be retained in service or requires to be given compulsory retirement, as the Committee is to assess his suitability taking into consideration his “entire service record”.