SUJATA V.MANOHAR, S.C.AGRAWAL
State Of Haryana – Appellant
Versus
Amarjit Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
S.C. agrawal, J.-This appeal, by special leave, arises out of a suit filed by the respondent-Amar Nath Bansal for a declaration that his retirement on attaining the age of 58 years was illegal and that he is entitled to continue in service till he attains the age of 62 years.
2. The respondent was appointed as a civilian clerk in the Army in the erstwhile State of Jind on July 12, 1943. In the Jind State the age of superannuation, as prescribed by Regulation 27 of the Jind State Civil Service Regulations, 1945, was 62 years. On May 5, 1948 the Ruler of Jind State and the Rulers of the States of Patiala, Kapurthala, Nabha, Fariodkot, Malerkotla, Nalagarh and Kalsia entered into a Covenant whereby they agreed to unite and integrate their territories in one State to be known as Patiala and East Punjab States Union (for short PEPSU ). As a result of the integration of the services of the Union States, the respondent was posted as Auditor in the Treasury in PEPSU. On the coming into force of the Constitution, PEPSU became a Part B State and continued as such till the re-organisation of the States under the States Re-organisation Act, 1956. With effect from November 1, 1956, the
Bholanath J. Thaker v. State of Saurashtra
M/s. Dalmia Dadri Cement Co. Ltd. v. CIT
State of Gujarat v. Vora Fiddali
Pema Chibar @ Premabhai Chhibabhai Tangal v. Union of India & Ors.
Vinodkumar Shantilal Gosalia v. Gangadhar Narsingdas Agarwal & Ors.
State of Orissa v. Bhupendra Kumar Bose
Gooderham and Worts Ltd. v. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.