Back
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J. M. Panchal & R. M. Lodha, JJ.
Nagaland Senior Govt. Employees Welfare Association & Ors. ...Appellants
Versus
The State of Nagaland & Ors. ...Respondents
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4955 OF 2010
(Arising out of SLP(C) No. 29786 of 2009)
Decided on : July 6, 2010.
(b) Service Law – Retirement – Age of – Prescribes retirement from the public employment at the age of 60 years or completion of 35 years of service, whichever is earlier – In consonance with 1993 Suppl. (2) SCC 592 – Fixation of retirement age is a matter of employment policy of the Government – No inflexible rule can be laid down. (Para 29, 31)
1993 Suppl. (2) SCC 592; (1985) 1 SCC 523 – Relied upon
(c) Nagaland Retirement from Public Employment Act, 1991 – Section 3 (as amended in 2009) – Validity – Retirement on attaining a particular age or alternatively on completion of a specified number of years of service, so long the number of years prescribed is not unreasonably small, can form a legally valid basis for framing of a retirement policy – Retirement on completion of 35 years of service is an entirely independent yardstick – Prescription of length of service of 35 years cannot be said to be unreasonably short or small – It cannot be said that impugned provision has been enacted without any data and consideration of broad aspects of the question – Merely because some employees had to retire from public employment on completion of 35 years of service although they have not completed 55 years of age it cannot be concluded that the impugned enactment is arbitrary, irrational, unfair and unconstitutional – The rule being uniform for all, it is not discriminatory – Judgment of the High Court in 1993 was per incuriam Yeshwant Singh Kothari – Section 3 held valid. (Para 41, 45, 46, 47)
AIR 1958 SC 731; AIR 1959 SC 942; (1964) 6 SCR 679; AIR (1968) SC 1; (1978) 2 SCC 1; (1988) 3 SCC 382; AIR 1983 SC 803 – Relied upon
Facts of the case:
The Confederation of All Nagaland State Service Employees Association challenged the constitutional validity of Section 3 of the Nagaland Retirement from Public Employment Act, 1991 which provided for retirement from public employment on completion of 33 years from the date of joining employment or until the age of 57 years, whichever is earlier by filing a writ petition before the Gauhati High Court.
The Single Judge of the Gauhati High Court upheld the reduction of retirement age from 58 to 57 years but struck down part of Section 3 of 1991 Act which prescribed the retirement from service on completion of 33 years of service. But no consequential relief was granted to the employees.
The Confederation challenged the order of the Single Judge insofar as consequential reliefs were denied to the employees. The Division Bench allowed the appeal on and held that affected employees shall be entitled to get their salary and other allowances and all other consequential benefits which they would have been entitled to upto the age of 57 years.
By Nagaland Retirement from Public Employment (Second Amendment) Act, 2009’ Section 3 of 1991 Act was substituted providing that a person in public employment shall hold office for a term of 35 years from the date of joining public employment or until he attains the age of 60 years, whichever is earlier.
The Association by a writ petition prayed that 2nd Amendment Act, 2009 be quashed to the extent it has introduced 35 years’ service as one of the conditions for retirement of government employees and direction be issued to the State to superannuate its employees only on attaining the prescribed age of 60. The Association also prayed for quashing OM dated July 20, 2009.
The Division Bench after hearing the parties dismissed the writ petition.
Finding of the Court
The amended section 3 of 1991 Act is not arbitrary or unreasonable or discriminatory. It is constitutionally valid.
Result:
Appeal dismissed.
JUDGEMENT
R.M. Lodha, J. Leave granted. Introduction
2. A new State - State of Nagaland - was formed by the State of Nagaland Act, 1962 (for short, `the 1962 Act') which came into force on December 1, 1963 comprising the territories which immediately before the appointed day were comprised in the Naga Hills - Tuensang Area of the State of Assam. Prior to the 1962 Act, Naga Hills-Tuensang Areas Act, 1957 was enacted by the Parliament by which certain changes were brought about with regard to the administration of the area viz., Naga Hills - Tuensang Area within the State of Assam. The pay structure applicable to civil servants of Assam was made applicable to the civil servants of the Naga Hills-Tuensang Area and as regards the service conditions including the age of superannuation, the Central Government Fundamental Rules and Subsidiary Rules were made applicable to them. After creation of the State of Nagaland, the conditions of service of the State Government employees continued to be governed by the same Rules. In 1990, the superannuation age of all the State Government employees other than grade-IV employees was raised from 55 years to 58 years. The 1991 Act 3. In 1991, Nagaland Retirement from Public Employment Act, 1991 (for short, `the 1991 Act') was enacted by the State Legislature which came into force on June 18, 2 1991. Section 3 thereof provided for retirement from public employment. It states :
"S.-3. Retirement from public employment:
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any rule or orders for the time being in force, a person in public employment shall hold office for a term of thirty-three years from the date of his joining public employment or until he attains the age of fifty-seven years whichever is earlier : Provided that in special circumstances, a person under public employment may be granted extension by the State Government upto a maximum of one year; Provided further that the Government may have the cases of all persons under public employment screened from time to time to determine their suitability for continuation in public employment after the attainment of the age of fifty years.
(2) All persons under public employment shall retire on the afternoon of the last day of the month in which he attains the age of fifty-seven years or on completion of thirty-three years of public employment whichever is earlier.
(3) xxx xxx xxx xxx
(4) xxx xxx xxx xxx
(5) xxx xxx xxx xxx"
As a matter of fact, the 1991 Act replaced the Nagaland Retirement from Public Employment Ordinance, 1991. Challenge to Section 3 (1991 Act)
4. The Confederation of All Nagaland State Service Employees Association (`the Confederation', for short) challenged the constitutional validity of Section 3 which provided for retirement from public employment on completion of 33 years from the date of joining employment or until the age of 57 years, whichever is earlier by filing a writ petition before the Gauhati High Court. The main grounds of challenge were :
(i) that retirement of the government employees at the age of 57 is arbitrary and
(ii) that classification of the government employees in two groups viz., one group of the government employees who are to retire on completion of 33 years service before attaining the age of 57 and the other group retiring at the age of 57 and having not completed 33 years of service is not permissible since retirement of government employees must be attributable to the age and not the length of tenure of service.
5. The Single Judge of the Gauhati High Court vide judgment dated January 18, 1993 upheld the reduction of retirement age from 58 to 57 years but struck down part of Section 3 of 1991 Act which prescribed the retirement from service on completion of 33 years of service. But no consequential relief was granted to the employees.
6. The Confederation challenged the order of the Single Judge dated January 18, 1993 by way of an intra court appeal insofar as consequential reliefs were denied to the empl
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
