Dr. Indira Shah, J.

1. Heard Mr. A. Zhimomi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. S. Mere, learned State counsel. The petitioner herein is working as Managing Director in Nagaland Industrial Development-cum-Corporation Limited (NIDC, in short). The petitioner was initially appointed in the Nagaland Pulp and Paper Company as Assistant Purchase Officer on 27.09.1978. He was promoted in the rank of Senior Executive (Purchase). In the later part of 1984, through an interview conducted by Nagaland Industrial Development Corporation, the petitioner was appointed in the Corporation as Project Manager. He was then placed on probation for a period of 1 (one) year. It has been stated that NIDC is an undertaking of Government of Nagaland. According, to the petitioner, the employee of NIDC are not Government servants and their services are governed by rules under the name and style "the Service Rules of NIDC, 1991". The State Government of Nagaland retirement from Public Employment Amendment Act, 2009 laid down the criteria for superannuation as 35 years of service or attaining 60 years of age. The NIDC, followed the criteria of the State Government for superannuation of its employees.

2. The petitioners' case is that after his resignation from NPPC on 11.02.1985, he was appointed in the NIDC on 13.02.1985, his appointment in the NIDC was a new and fresh appointment. The issue of his entry into the service in the NIDC arose in the year 2011. The petitioner submitted a representation highlighting the history of his service and prayed for appropriate fixation of his entry into the service in the NIDC. However, the representation submitted by the petitioner was rejected by letter dated 03.08.2011 and he was informed that his duty of joining the NPPC would be taken as date of joining of his service in NIDC. The petitioner submitted another representation requesting appropriate action in relation to his entry into the service, which was also rejected vide order dated 17.05.2013, wherein his date of entry into the service of the NIDC is shown as 28.09.1978 and his date of retirement of completion of 35 years of service is shown as 30.09.2013. The petitioners' contention is that he entered into the service of NIDC on 13.02.1985 and therefore his date of superannuation should be on completion of 60 years of age or 35 years of service and he reaches the age of superannuation only in the year 2015.

3. The respondent No. 2 in his affidavit-in-opposition denied that the petitioner was appointed through an interview conducted by the NIDC. According, to respondent No. 2, who was appointed as Project Manager through a selection process was subsequently promoted to the post of General Manager and thereafter the petitioner vide application dated 29.01.1985 applied for appointment in the said resultant vacancy and authorities considering his application appointed him to the said post of Project Manager.

4. It is averred that Rule 20 of NIDC Rule 1991 clearly provides that an employee shall retire at the age of prescribed by the State Government from time to time attaining the age of superannuation, an employee shall retire from the service of corporation and the Nagaland retirement from Public Employment Act, 2009 is therefore applicable for the employees of NIDC.

5. In fact, the member employees of NIDC have been retiring from service on completion of 35 years of service or attaining age of 60 years as provided under the Act. It is, further, contended that the applicability of Nagaland employee from Public Employment Act, 2009 to the employees of NIDC was dealt in the case of WPC No. 236(k) 2012. The said writ petition was disposed of by this Court holding that the corporation is following the Act of Government of Nagaland and as such the Act of the State Government is applicable to NIDC.

6. It is also contended that after joining the NIDC, the petitioner submitted the representation stating that as he has joined NIDC through pro