R.N.PRASAD, M.L.VISA
Sushree Sumitra Kumari – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent
R.N.Prasad, J.
1. By this writ petition under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner, who was a member of Subordinate Judicial Service and posted as Subordinate Judge, Ranchi, prayed for quashing the order contained in letter no. 19542 dated 6/7.12.1999 whereby she was not allowed the benefit of retirement at the age of 60 years rather to retire at the age of 58 years, Annexure-5, the order contained in letter no. 2458 dated 19.2.2000 whereby her representation dated 4.1.2000 to allow her benefit to retire at the age of 60 years has been rejected, Annexure-7, and also the adverse remarks recorded on 11.10.1999 by the Inspecting Judge communicated to her vide letter dated 6.12.1999, Annexure-3.
2. The petitioner has challenged the communication, Annexure-5 not allowing the benefit of enhancement of retirement age from 58 to 60 years on the ground; firstly, that in view of the decision of the Apex Court, the retirement age of Judicial Officer stood increased to 60 years, before attaining the age of. 60 years the petitioner cannot be made to retire at the age of 58 years except by following procedure for compulsory retirement, the order, Annexure-5, in
Rajat Baran Roy & Ors. V/s. State Of West Bengal & Ors.
Registrar V/s. Sarnam Singh And Anr.
All India Judges Association And Anr. V/s. Union Of India And Ors.
All India Judges Association V/s. Union Of India And Ors.
Baikunth Nath Das & Ors. V/s. Chief District Medical Officer, Baripada And Ors.
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.