SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(SC) 1091

A.K.MATHUR, A.R.LAKSHMANAN
Chairman U. P. , Jal Nigam – Appellant
Versus
Jaswant Singh – Respondent


JUDGMENT

A.K. Mathur, J.—Leave granted.

2. All this batch of appeals involve similar questions of law and fact, therefore, they are disposed of by this common order.

3. All these respondents are the employees of the Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam ( hereinafter to be referred to as ‘the Nigam’) and they were retired on attaining the age of superannuation at 58 years. Some of them filed writ petitions in the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad challenging the retirement of the employees of the Nigam on attaining the age of 58 years whereas the State Government employees were allowed to continue up to the age of 60 years and therefore, they should also be allowed to continue up to the age of 60 years. The writ petitions filed before the High Court failed and against that Civil Appeal No.7840 of 2002 and batch of other appeals were filed before this Court. This Court disposed of the case of Harwindra Kumar along with other appeals and held that employees of Nigam are entitled to continue up to 60 years. This has been reported in (2005) 13 SCC 300. The operative portion of the said judgment reads as under :

“10. For the foregoing reasons, we are of the view that so long as Regulation 31







































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top