The petitioner, a Sweeper working in the first respondent College sought for a Writ of Mandamus for declaring the action of the College in retiring the petitioner on 28.02.2009 on attaining the age of 58 years and not permitting him to work in the college up to the age of 60 years, as illegal and unjust and consequently to direct the respondents to continue the petitioner in service till he attains the age of 60 years. The petitioner was appointed as a Sweeper in the first respondent College, which is a private educational institution. He submits that his date of birth being 02.02.1951 and the age of superannuation for the last grade servants being 60 years, he is entitled to continue in the service till the end of February 2011, whereas, the respondents 1 & 2 sought to retire him from service on his attaining the age of 58 years. The case of the petitioner is that, in accordance with Section 3 of Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Regulation of Age of Superannuation) Act 1984, every government employee, not being a workman, who belongs to the last grade shall be retired from service in the afternoon of the last day of the month in which he attains the age of 60 years. It is the further case of the writ petitioner that, in terms of and in accordance with Section 78(A) of the Andhra Pradesh Education Act, 1982 (henceforth referred to as the Act), every teaching or member of the non-teaching staff employed in any aided or private educational institution not belonging to the last grade service shall retire from service on the afternoon of the last day of the month in which he attains the age of 58 years. For those who are working in the last grade service of such institutions, the age of retirement is 60 years. Since the post of a Sweeper falls within the last grade service, the petitioner claims that he is entitled to continue in service till he attains the age of superannuation of 60 years. Since the respondents 1 & 2 are seeking to prematurely retire him from service on attaining the age of 58 years, the present writ petition is instituted.

2. On behalf of the 1 and 2 respondents, the second respondent/Principal of the engineering college filed a detailed counter affidavit in the matter. It is asserted that, the engineering college established by the first respondent is a self-financed and unaided institution and it is purely dependent upon the fees collected from its students and does not receive any aid from the Government. It is further asserted that the Governing Body of the Society which established the college has been vested with the exclusive power to formulate policy decisions and that the Governing Body accordingly framed certain terms and conditions of employment which are applicable in respect of the employees/staff of the said engineering college. Condition No.2 of the terms and conditions formulated by the Governing Body of the college reads as under:

."Subject to the provisions of the Rules, the appointments to posts under the Institute shall ordinarily be made on probation for a period of two years after which period the appointee, if confirmed, shall continue to hold his office, subject to the provisions of the Rules and the Bye laws, till he attains the age of 60 years in case of teaching staff or 58 years in case of other staff."

3. Based on the above condition, it is pleaded that the writ petitioner being a nonteaching staff member, is entitled to continue in service till such time he attains the age of 58 years and hence he was rightly retired from service in the afternoon of 28.02.2009 and there is nothing illegal about this action. It is specifically urged that the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Regulation of Age of Superannuation) Act 1984, are not applicable in respect of the employees/staff working in the first respondent college of engineering. It is also further contended that, since the first respondent is an unaided private educational institution, the provision con