IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the autonomy of Cooperative Credit Societies in making decisions regarding personnel policy, staffing, and retirement age, and the importance of considering financial capacity and regulatory guidelines in such decisions.

JUDGMENT

Dhiraj Singh Thakur, CJ. - We propose to decide this batch of petitions by way of a common judgment and order in view of the fact that similar questions of fact and law arise in this set of cases. For purposes of reference, facts as contained in W.P. No.4861 of 2018 shall be referred to.

2. The petitioners all were employees of the Prakasam District Cooperative Central Bank Limited, who retired at the age of 58 years having attained the age of superannuation and retired by the year 2017. The case of the petitioners is that they ought to have been retired on attaining the age of 60 years. With a view to support this fact, the petitioners stated that the Andhra Pradesh Legislature enacted the Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Regulation of Age of Superannuation) (Amendment) Act, 2014, (for short, 'Act No.4 of 2014') whereby in Section 3(1), the following sub-section was substituted.

'(1) Every Government employee shall retire from service on the afternoon of the last day of the month in which he attains the age of sixty years.'

3. It would not be out of place to reproduce hereinbelow the definition of 'Government employee' under the Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Regulation of Age of Superannuation) Act, 1984 (for short, 'Act No.23 of 1984), which reads as under:

'(3) 'Government employee' includes all categories of officers and employees referred to in sub-section (2) of section 1'.

4. Sub-section (2) of Section 1 further envisages as:

'(2) It shall apply to-

(i) persons appointed to public services and posts in connection with the affairs of the State;

(ii) officers and other employees working in any local authority, whose salaries and allowances are paid out of the Consolidated Fund of the State;

(iii) persons appointed to the Secretariat staff of the Houses of the State Legislature; and

(iv) every other officer or employee whose conditions of service are regulated by rules framed under the proviso to article 309 of the Constitution of India immediately before the commencement of this Act, other than the village officers and law officers; whether appointed before or after the commencement of this Act.'

5. The Government of Andhra Pradesh issued G.O.Ms.No.147, dated 30.06.2014, providing instructions for implementation of the Act No.4 of 2014 reiterating the fact that the provisions of the Act No.4 of 2014 was applicable only to the categories mentioned therein and none else. Subsequently, G.O.Ms.No.112, dated 18.06.2016, was issued whereby it was envisaged that the enhancement of age of superannuation would not be made applicable to the employees of the Public Sector Undertakings and Institutions listed in the IX and X Schedules of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014 (for short, 'the Reorganisation Act') until the matter of division of assets and liabilities of the institutions between the states of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana was settled and the allotment of the employees between the two states was finalized for those public section undertakings and institutions.

6. It appears that the decision taken by the Government of Andhra Pradesh enhancing the age of superannuation of employees of public sector undertakings under the administrative control of the Government from 58 to 60 years was kept in abeyance till such time as a policy was formulated in that regard. The G.O.Ms.No.112 came to be challenged in G. Rama Mohan Rao v. Government of Andhra Pradesh, (2017) SCC OnLine Hyd 54 which was disposed of by virtue of judgment and order, dated 07.03.2017, wherein it was held that the earlier Government Orders were issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh without the legal entities amending their rules and regulations and bye-laws governing the age of superannuation and without the prior approval of the sole or majority shareholder i.e., the State Government. It was held:

'192.. It is only if the request of these Companies/Corporations/Societies, for amendment of its byelaws/rules and regulations, are approved by the State