Judgment

M.M.PUNCHHI, J.

(1) SPECIAL leave granted in these three connected petitions.

(2) EACH appellant in these appeals was an employee of the State Bank of Indore (a subsidiary bank of the State Bank of India), the first respondent in these appeals. They were initially in the employment of the Bank of Indore Limited which ceased to exist with effect from 1/01/1960 and became a subsidiary bank known as the State Bank of Indore, in the wake of the State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks) Act, 1959 (hereafter referred to as the "Act"). The existing employees of the kind of the appellants claimed to have certain service rights protected under Section 11 of the aforesaid Act inclusive of the right to continue till the age of 58 years. They were however made to retire before attaining the age of 58 years on different dates, but upon completing 30 years of actual service. The subsidiary bank claims to have exercised powers under Regulation 19(1 of the State Bank of Indore (Officers) Service Regulations, 1979 (hereafter referred to as the "Regulations"), in taking such steps.

(3) THE respective appellants moved the High court of Madhya Pradesh under Article 226 of the Constitution claiming inter alia that Regulation 19 could not be invoked in their cases and, if at all it could, then that was ultra vires and in exercise of excessive delegation of legislative powers made over to the State Bank of India under Section 63 of the Act. The High court by a common judgment dated 17/01/1989 dismissed the writ petitions of the appellants being Miscellaneous Petition No. 1187 of 1985, Miscellaneous Petition No. 3532 of 1988 and Miscellaneous Petition No. 3197 of 1986, respectively. While these were put to challenge, it was felt by this court on 26/02/1992 that the State Bank of India, though originally not a respondent before the High court, should be added as a party since the impugned Regulation 19 had been framed by the central Board of Directors of the State Bank of India under the powers conferred on it by Section 63 of the Act. Notice accordingly was given to the State Bank of India and apparently its stance is supportive of the impugned Regulation.

(4) WHEN the Act came into force on 1/01/1960 and the subsidiary bank, the State Bank of Indore, came into existence, the age of superannuation of its employees was clearly 58 years. The Regulations came into force on 1/10/1979, almost 19 years later. The field pre- existing was governed by office circulars and departmental practices besides Section 11(1 of the Act, which provided as follows:

"TRANSFER of services of employees of existing banks.- Save as otherwise provided in this Act, every employee of an existing Bank in the employment of that bank immediately before the appointed day, shall, on and from that day, become an employee of the corresponding new bank and shall hold his office or service therein by the same tenure at the same remuneration and upon the same terms and conditions and with the same rights and privileges as to pension, gratuity and other matters as he would have held the same on the appointed day, if the undertaking of the existing bank had not been transferred to and vested in the corresponding new bank and shall continue to do so unless and until his employment in that bank is terminated or until his remuneration or other terms and conditions of service are revised or altered by the corresponding new bank under, or in pursuance of any law, or in accordance with any provision which, for the time being governs, his service."

(5) AND then Regulation 19(1, insofar as is relevant, provides as follows:

"19. Age of retirement.(1 An officer shall retire from the service of the Bank on attaining the age of fifty-eight years or upon the completion of thirty years service, whichever occurs first: Provided further that the competent authority may, at its discretion, extend the period of service of an officer who has attai