1. Whether a person, appointed on his retirement from the Indian Army, in the Tripura State Rifles, becomes a member of the Tripura State Rifles ('the TSR')? Whether a person, as a member of the TSR, on extended service beyond the period of retirement in the TSR, will be entitled to receive the benefit of the increase in age of the members of the TSR? These are the two important questions, which the present writ appeal has raised.

2. In order to answer the questions posed above, we set out, in brief, hereinbelow the material facts, which have given rise to the present writ appeal.

3. The petitioner was, by order, dated 23.4.2001, appointed, though provisionally, as a Naik, in the TSR, against existing vacancy of 8th Battalion, Tripura State Rifles.

4. At the relevant point of time, when the petitioner was so serving as a member of the TSR, the age of superannuation, for the post of Naik in the TSR, was 50 years. In the ordinary course, the petitioner would have superannuated as a Naik in the midnight of 31.8.2010. Before, however, the petitioner could retire, on superannuation, as indicated hereinbefore, an order was made, on 23.7.2010, by the Director General of Police, Tripura, extending the petitioner's service beyond the age of his superannuation with effect from 1.9.2010 to 30.11.2010. On 20.10.2010, the State Government, in exercise of its powers under section 22 of the Tripura State Rifles Act, 1983, amended, by way of 'substitution', rule 27 of the Tripura State Rifles (Discipline, Control, Service conditions, etc.) Rules, 1986, prescribing 52 years as the age of superannuation for the rank holders of Naik increasing thereby the age of superannuation by two years from 50 to 52 years. The petitioner made a representation seeking to receive the benefit of the said amended provisions of rule 27 so as to enable him to get enhanced pensionary benefits. This was declined by order, dated 30.11.2010, issued by the Commandant, 8th Battalion, Tripura State Rifles, whereby the petitioner has been released on the ground of having attained the age of superannuation in terms of the unamended rule 27, which prescribed, as indicated hereinbefore, 50 years as the age of superannuation for the rank holders of Naik. The petitioner, feeling aggrieved, filed a writ petition, under article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging, inter alia, the order, dated 30.11.2010, aforementioned, and seeking setting aside and quashing of the same. This writ petition gave rise to WP(C) No.97/2011. As the writ petition has been dismissed by judgment and order, dated 10.8.2011, the petitioner is before us in appeal.

5. We have heard Mr. Somik Deb, learned counsel, for the appellant, and Ms. A.S. Lodh, learned Government advocate, appearing on behalf of the respondents.

6. Shorn off immaterial details, what needs to be noted, at the very outset, is that it is the admitted case of the parties that by notification, dated 20.10.2010, the State Government, in exercise of its powers, under section 22 of the Tripura State Rifles Act, 1983, amended rule 27 by, inter alia, increasing the age of superannuation of various rank holders including the holders of the rank of Naik, who were to retire, under the pre-amended rule 27, on completion of 50 years of age. By way of amendment of rule 27, as mentioned hereinbefore, the age of superannuation of a person, holding the rank of Naik, was increased to 52 years. The petitioner, having been appointed on his release from the Army to the post of Naik, against the existing vacancy in 8th Battalion, in the regular scale of pay, became a member of the TSR. This position could not be assailed before us, because the term 'Rifles' has been defined, by section 3(s) of the Tripura State Rifles Act, 1983, to mean Tripura State Rifles and section 3(j) defines 'Member of the Rifles' to mean, inter alia, a person, who has been appointed to the Rifles by the Inspector General or, as the case may be, by the Commandant