IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that subsequent government actions can render initial petitions moot, affecting the adjudication of related legal challenges.

ORDER :

Heard Sri Chandraiah Naidu, learned counsel appearing for Sri B.Hanumantha Rao, Sri Sai Harsha, learned counsel representing Sri B. Raghava Reddy, and Sri Sainadh, learned counsel representing Sri Sai Kumar and Smt.A.Varalakshmi, learned counsels for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services and learned Sri Sazid, learned counsel representing Sri E.V.Jagannadha Rao, learned Standing Counsel for A.P State Housing Corporation Ltd.

2. Since the issue involved in the Writ Petitions is one and the same, this Court is inclined to pass common order.

3. Petitioners, the employees of A.P Housing Board Corporation Ltd., filed these writ petitions for not extending the age of superannuation from 60 years to 62 years, in terms of G.O.Ms.No.15 Finance (HR.IV-FR&LR) Department dated 31.01.2022, despite the resolution passed by the Board of Directors in 27th Board meeting dated 22.03.2022 as illegal, arbitrary and etc.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that age of superannuation to the Government employees was extended by amending A.P Public employment (Regulation of Age of Superannuation) Act., 1984 dated 19.08.2022 vide G.O.Ms.No.15 dated 31.01.2022 from 60 years to 62 years. In pursuance of said G.O, the board of directors of the 3rd respondent passed resolution on 22.03.2022 enhancing the age of superannuation to its employees from 60 years to 62 years. The said proposal was forwarded to the Government. Pending the decision by the Government, since the employees attained 60 years and proceedings were issued qua superannuation, these writ petitions are filed.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that in Writ Petition No.8742 of 2023 interim order was passed by this Court directing the respondent authorities to continue the employee till the age of 62 years. By virtue of the interim order, the employee therein has been continuing and vacate stay petition was filed vide I.A No.2 of 2023. The learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit that retiring the employees without extending the age of superannuation is illegal and erroneous. He also would submit that age of superannuation has been extended to the employees in Government service keeping in view the experience and expertise of senior employees and considering the increased life expectancy. They also would submit that the action of the 3rd respondent in not extending is unjust, arbitrary and illegal.

6. The matters are adjourned from time to time to get instructions. Today, the learned Government Pleader for Services-I and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Corporation submitted a copy of the proceedings of Special Chief Secretary to Government vide letter No.1699176/VC.A2/2022-2 dated 18.07.2024. A perusal of the said letter would indicate that the proposal of the Managing Director, APSHCL, in pursuance of the board resolution for extension of enhancing of superannuation from 60 years to 62 years to its employees was rejected. Copies of the proceedings are handed over to the learned counsels for the petitioners.

7. This Court has perused the proceedings vide letter No.1692/22-2 dated 18.07.2024. Para 6 of the proceedings relevant is extracted herewith:

“…..Government in exercise of powers conferred under Rule 6, Chapter-I of A.P.S.H.C.L. Service Rules, 1998, issued vide G.O.Ms.No.33, Housing (RH) Department dated 26.05.1998, the proposal of the Managing Director, A.S.H.C.L. for extension of „enhancement of age of superannuation from 60 years to 62 years? to employees of A.P. State Housing Corporation based on the resolution passed by the Board of A.P.S.H.C.L. during the 27th Board of Directors Meeting held on 22.03.2022, is hereby rejected….”

8. At this juncture, learned counsels appearing for the petitioners sought leave to challenge the said proceedings issued by Spl. Chief Secretary to Government, referred to supra. Thus, without going into merits of the matter, in view of the subsequent developm