Back
G. RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD
K. Swarna Kumari – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
G.RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J. - Heard Smt. P. Vijaya Kumari, Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and Sri Harish Kumar Rasineni, Learned Standing Counsel for SERP (Society for Elimination of Rural Poverty).
2. The prayer sought in the present Writ Petition is as under:
"It is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not extending the age of superannuation of the petitioner from 60 years to 62 years in terms of G.O.Ms.No.15, dtd. 31/1/2022 while extending the age to the similarly situated persons as illegal, arbitrary and unjust, discriminatory and consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner in service until she attains the age of superannuation of 62 years on par with the government employees in terms of G.O.Ms.No.15, dtd. 31/1/2022 with all consequential benefits and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."
FACTS IN BRIEF:
3. It is the case of the Writ Petitioner that she is presently working as Senior Assistant in the Office of the Project Direc
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the Model Service Regulations and the applicability of G.O.Ms.No.15, dtd. 31/1/2022, to the Writ Petitioner's case, based ....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the applicability of G.O.Ms.No.15, dtd. 31/1/2022, which enhanced the age of superannuation of Government Employees from 60 years to 62 years, t....
The enhancement of retirement age is a policy matter for the State Government and is not automatically applicable to all educational institutions under its governance without amendments to respective....
The amendment to superannuation age applies to the petitioners as they are covered under service regulations, ensuring parity with government employees.
The Court held that the enhancement of age of superannuation to 62 years is a policy decision of the State Government and does not automatically apply to employees governed by independent Bye-laws.
The age of superannuation is governed by the specific bylaws of an institution, dictated by policy decisions of the State government.
The determination of superannuation age is a policy decision of the government, requiring its approval for amendments, and courts cannot intervene without legal authority.
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
