The enhancement of the age of superannuation requires governmental approval and is a matter of policy.

JUDGMENT :

Battu Devanand, J.

These two writ appeals filed against the common order passed by the learned single Judge of this Court on 18.11.2025 in W.P.Nos.7752 of 2024 and 21706 of 2025.

2. The parties in the Appeals will be referred to as they are arrayed in the Writ Petitions for convenience.

3. Heard Sri Subba Rao Korrapati, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for respondents in both the writ appeals and carefully perused the material available on record.

4. The petitioner in W.P.No.7752 of 2024 worked as Foreman in A.P. Cooperation Oil Growers Federation Limited. He filed the writ petition aggrieved by the action of the A.P. Cooperation Oil Growers Federation Limited in withdrawing the resolution passed on 01.02.2022 reducing the age of Superannuation from 62 to 60 years as per the Board Meeting Circulation, dated 25.01.2024 and for not continuing him up to 62 years as per the Board Resolution, dated 01.02.2022.

5. The petitioner in W.P.No.1248 of 2025 worked as Secretary (I/C/RM) (Retd.) in the Head Office of A.P. State Where Housing Corporation, Vijayawada. He filed the writ petition aggrieved by the proceedings, dated 17.12.2024 informing him that he should retire from the service by 30.06.2025 on attaining the age of Superannuation without considering the minutes of 208^th Board Meeting, dated 14.03.2022 and against the action in withdrawing the resolution of adoption of G.O.Ms.No.15 vide the minutes of 216^th meeting held on 29.12.2023 by the A.P. State Where Housing Corporation.

6. These two writ petitions were heard by the learned single Judge of this Court along with the batch of writ petitions filed seeking the similar relief and was pleased to dismiss all the writ petitions by a common order, dated 18.11.2025 holding that as there is no amendment to the service rules and as there is no concurrence of the State Government for enhanced age of Superannuation and considering the fact that the age of Superannuation is a condition of service and as per the rules any amendment requires concurrence of the State Government. It was held that no relief can be granted to the petitioners anticipating the decision of the committee constituted pursuant to G.O.Rt.No.1545, General Administration (Cabinet.I) Department, dated 22.08.2025. Aggrieved by the common order, dated 18.11.2025, the petitioners in W.P.Nos.1247 of 2024 and 1248 of 2025 preferred the present appeals.

7. It is the case of the petitioners that the Boards of the Corporations wherein they are working passed resolutions on different dates i.e., on 22.03.2022 and 01.02.2022 wherein the age of Superannuation was enhanced from 60 to 62 years and subsequently the said Board Resolutions has been withdrawn again confirming the retirement age at 60 years. The petitioners filed writ petitions seeking for enhancing the age of Superannuation of 62 years in terms of G.O.Ms.No.15, dated 31.01.2022.

8. Admittedly, the petitioners are not the State Government employees. The conditions of service of the petitioners are governed by their respective Corporation Rules and Regulations. It is also an admitted fact that the State Government has constituted a committee of Hon’ble Ministers under G.O.Rt.No.1545, General Administration (Cabinet.I) Department, dated 22.08.2025 for examining the feasibility of enhancement of age of Superannuation from 60 to 62 years to the employees working in Government Institutions/Societies/Corporations including in Schedules IX and X of the A.P. Reorganization Act, 2014. The Board Resolutions has to be approved by the State Government. As on the date, there is no amendment t