B. K. SOMASEKHARA, J.

( 1 ) HEARD on merits.

( 2 ) HAVING heard the learned arguments of both the sides by the learned advocates, this Court confronts itself with the following question for determination:- whether the age of superannuation of the petitioner is 65 years by virtue of Rule 4 (2) of the Rules under Section 100 sub-section (2) (y) of the Madras hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951 (for short the 1951 act ) as per G. O. Ms. No. 584 Rural Welfare dated 28th May, 1952, in part-I which reads as follows:- "4 (2) Except in the case of a hereditary officer or servant, no person may be appointed to or hold any office unless he is not less than twenty-five and not more that sixty-five years of age. " the factual periphery in the case is limited. The petitioner is an Executive engineer and an employee of the respondent. Initially he was appointed as a Supervisor in the respondent-temple on 20-2-1970 and came to be promoted as Executive Engineer on 1-3-1990. His date of birth is 1-7-1939. Proceedings r. C. No. 81/452/96/3 dated 31-5-1996 were issued by the respondent to superannuate the petitioner on 30-6-1997 based on such a date of birth and on the basis of the ag

Click Here to Read the rest of this document