R.D.DHANUKA, R.I.CHAGLA
Lalit Rajendra Gajanan – Appellant
Versus
Vidyavardhani – Respondent
JUDGMENT
R.D.DHANUKA, J. - The petitioner in Writ Petition No. 3125 of 2020 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India prays for a declaration that the age of retirement of the petitioner who worked as polytechnic lecturer is 60 years and cannot be treated as 58 years. The petitioner also seeks a writ of certiorari for quashing and setting aside the communication dated 31st December, 2019 informing the petitioner that he stood retired on attaining the age of 58 years. The petitioner seeks permission to perform his duties in the said post till the actual retirement after attaining the age of 60 years and seeks payment of salary due and payable from 1st January, 2020 till the date of retirement of the petitioner with interest @ 18% p.a. on the amount due and payable till payment within four weeks.
2. The petitioner in the Writ Petition No. 3617 of 2020 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India prays for a writ of certiorari for quashing and setting aside the provisions of the Government Resolution dated 27th February, 2003 in as much as the same affect the age of the retirement of the employees reducing the same from 60 years to 58 years and denies the right of th
Bharthidasan University and Another vs. All India Council For Technical Education
Bindeshwari Ram V/S. State of Bihar
Chandrakant Sakharam Karkhanis and Ors. vs. State of Maharashtra
Jagdish Sharma and Ors. vs. State of Bihar
Nishad Sadashiv Pawar vs. Dnyanasadhana College
Parshvanath Charitable Trust and Ors. V/S. All India Council For Technical Education
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.