SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

1986 Supreme(Ker) 379

Judges : V.SIVARAMAN NAIR
kerala gazetted officers front - Appellant
Versus
state of kerala - Respondent
Case No : O. P. No. 6541, 6971 etc. of 1986
Decided On : 11/07/1986
Advocates Appeared :
George Varghese Kannamthanam, P.K. Appa Nair, P. Gopalakrishnan Nair, V.R. Venkatakrishnan. V.P. Mohankumar, S.A. Nagendran. K.K. Usha, N. Haridas, M.R. Rajendran Nair. Pirappancode V. Sreedharan Nair, Palazhi Gopinatha Menon. Govind Bharathan, Siby Mathew & K.R.B. Kaimal Govt. Pleader & C.P. Sudhakara Prasad

The fixation of 55 years as the age of superannuation for Government employees is not unreasonable or arbitrary, and the matter of policy with possible reverberations in the regions of complex problems of unemployment is a matter better decided by the State as a part of a comprehensive national employment policy with the assistance of sociologists and economists rather than the court.

Headnote:

AGE OF RETIREMENT - GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES - Kerala Service Rules - R.60(a) - Ext. P1, Ordinance 63 of 1984 - Ext. P7 News Report dated 21st May, 1985 - Art.14 of the Constitution of India - N. Srinivasan v. State of Kerala 1967 KLT. 853:1968 SLR. 1 - Union of India v. J. K Sinha, AIR 1971 SC 40 - State of Bombay v. Subhag Chand M. Dossi AIR 1957 SC 892 - Nagaraj v. State of A.P., AIR 1985 SC 551 - (1968) 2 SLR 718 - (1973) I SLR 755 - Art.21 of the Constitution of India

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners, employees of the State Government, sought revision of their age of retirement from 55 years to 58 or 60 years, citing various grounds such as the increase in life expectancy, the age of retirement in other sectors, and the potential savings and employment opportunities from extending the retirement age.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the age of retirement was fixed at 55 years decades ago and requires reconsideration in view of the changed circumstances. However, it held that the fixation of 55 years as the age of superannuation for Government employees is not unreasonable or arbitrary. The court dismissed the petitions, stating that the matter of policy with possible reverberations in the regions of complex problems of unemployment is a matter better decided by the State as a part of a comprehensive national employment policy with the assistance of sociologists and economists rather than the court.

Issues: The main issues were the reasonableness of the age of retirement for Government employees, the potential savings and employment opportunities from extending the retirement age, and the violation of Art.14 and Art.21 of the Constitution of India.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the fixation of 55 years as the age of superannuation for Government employees is not unreasonable or arbitrary. It emphasized that the problem of unemployment in the country is a complex problem and that practical considerations of policy and expediency should play a major role in dealing with it. The court also stated that the matter of policy with possible reverberations in the regions of complex problems of unemployment is a matter better decided by the State as a part of a comprehensive national employment policy with the assistance of sociologists and economists rather than the court.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the petitions, stating that the matter of policy with possible reverberations in the regions of complex problems of unemployment is a matter better decided by the State as a part of a comprehensive national employment policy with the assistance of sociologists and economists rather than the court.

Judgment :-

1. Petitioner's in these Original Petitions are employees of the State Government or their representative associations. Such Government servants are those who are to retire from service on superannuation on the attainment of 55 years of age as provided in R.60(a). Part.2, Kerala Service Rules. They seek revision of their age of retirement from 55 years to 58 or 60 years. Incidentally they also pray that the respondent State may be directed to continue them in service even after they attain the age of superannuation in accordance with R.60(a). Part.1, Kerala Service Rules.

2. Some of the principal grounds urged by petitioners are that the age of superannuation has been refixed as 60 for teachers and academics in all the Universities and that the benefit of such revised age of retirement has been extended to Coaches, personnel in the Physical Education Department, Instructors etc. The age of retirement of members of the Kerala Public Service Commission is 62 years, in Nationalised Banks 58 years, in Statutory Boards and Corporations 58 to 60 years, for Class.4 employees appointed prior to 7-4-1970 60 years, for NMR workers on absorption into regular establishment 58 years, and State Service Officers promoted to IAS cadre 58 years. Reference is also made to the

recommendations made by the Central Pay Commission, where by the age of retirement is proposed to be enhanced to 60 years. Specific reference is made to Ext. P1, Ordinance 63 of 1984, amending S.42 (4) of the Kerala Agricultural University Act enhancing the age of retirement from 55 to 60 years for Deans, Directors, Librarians and Teachers under the University, whereas the age of retirement of other staff is retained as 55 years Clause.10 of the Kerala University First Statutes, 1977 prescribing the age of retirement of University Teachers as 60 years and Exts.P2, P3 and P4 orders extending that benefit to the University Coaches and personnel in the Physical Education Department in Calicut University are also referred to. Exts. P5 and P6, Press Reports dated 26th April, 1985 about the statement of the Chief Minister and Ext.P7 News Report dated 21st May, 1985 regarding the statement of the then Minister for Finance, seemingly supporting the demand for refixation of the age of retirement are also relied upon. Ext. P8 memorandum submitted in January, 1985 by the Kerala Gazetted Officers Association and Ext. P9 representation dated 18-5-1985 submitted by the Kerala Gazetted Officers Front have urged the Government to refix the age of retirement at 60 years. Technical Officers of the Animal Husbandry Department and former employees of the Agricultural Department who were absorbed into Kerala Agricultural University are said to be continuing in service beyond 55 years, the former on re-employment basis and the latter by virtue of their absorption into Kerala Agricultural University without ascertaining the option of the senior officers. The 8th petitioner in OP. No. 6541 of 1986 points out that he has to retire at 55 years, whereas many of his juniors in Ext. P10 seniority list, who were absorbed into Kerala Agricultural University have got the benefit of continuance in service upto 60 years. Reference is made to Ext. P10 and Ext. P11 orders extending the age of retirement of Livestock Assistants and Veterinary Surgeons after retirement at the age of 55 years. Exts. P12 to P14 are similar orders of re-employment of personnel who retired from the Labour Department. On the basis of these facts, petitioners submits that the age of retirement has to be refixed. Age of retirement was fixed as 55 years at a time when the maximum age limit for entry into service had been fixed as 25 years. The period of qualifying service necessary for earning full pension as provided in the Kerala Service Rules is 30 years. It is stated that with the refixation of the maximum age limit for entry into service as 35 years, many may not be able to complete the qualifying service to earn full p


































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top