ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.

1. These Writ Appeals and Writ Petitions raise identical questions of facts and law and have been heard together. Writ Appeal No. 1056 of 2008 is being treated as the leading Writ Appeal and reference of pleadings in the said Writ Appeal shall suffice in deciding all the cases.

2. W.A. No. 1056 of 2008 has been filed by the State of Kerala challenging the judgment dated 22.08.2007 in W.P. (C) No. 22236 of 2005. W.P. (C) No. 22236 of 2005 was filed by the Kerala Land Development Corporation Employees' Union and 82 employees challenging the decision of the State Government refusing to approve the proposal of the Kerala Land Development Corporation to increase the age of retirement of its employees from 55 to 60 years. The Learned Single Judge quashed the order of the State Government and directed that employees of the Corporation shall be entitled to continue in service till 60 years as resolved by the Board of Directors in its meeting dated 14.05.1998.

3. The other Writ Appeals have been filed by the employees of the Corporation challenging the judgments of the learned Single Judge by which judgments the Writ Petitions filed by the petitioners claiming entitlement to continue till the age of 60 years has been dismissed.

4. Brief facts of the case as emerged from the pleadings in W.A. No. 1056 of 2008 are as follows: The Kerala Land Development Corporation (for short, the Corporation) is a Government Company within the meaning of Section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956. The Corporation was constituted by the State Government. Articles of Association of the Corporation requires that prior approval of the Government is required with regard to several matters enumerated therein. One of the matters enumerated is the conditions of service, Provident Fund and other Rules. The State Government approved the Kerala Land Development Corporation Service Rules by order dated 20.09.1979 wherein under Rule 21, the age of retirement of every employees of the Corporation was fixed as 55 years. The Board of Directors vide its resolution dated 14.05.1998 resolved to raise the age of retirement of the employees of the Corporation from 55 to 60 years. The said resolution was submitted to the Government for approval as required by the Articles of Association. The State Government in reference to the letter of the Managing Director of the Corporation informed that the request for enhancing retirement age of the employees of the Corporation cannot be considered keeping in view of the present state of affairs of the Corporation which is being running on loss. The said letter of the State Government dated 30.11.1999 is annexed as Ext.P7. The Corporation repeated its requests to approve the decision of enhancement of retirement age. Letter dated 09.04.2003 was sent by the Deputy Secretary of Agricultural Production Commissioner stating that the request is under consideration. Writ Petition No. 12452 of 2004 was filed by the employees of the Corporation praying for a direction to consider their representation by which they have prayed for taking a decision regarding enhancement of retirement age. This Court disposed of the said Writ Petition by judgment dated 04.06.2004 directing the Government to take a decision within four months from the production of copy of the said judgment. By letter dated 15.10.2004, the State Government communicated the Managing Director of the Corporation that the Government has taken a decision to reject the request to enhance retirement age from 55 to 60 years.

5. Writ petition No. 22236 of 2005 was filed by the Employees' Union of the Corporation as 1st petitioner and petitioners 2 to 83 being its employees challenging the aforesaid decision of the State Government. In the Writ Petition the following prayers have been made:-

(i) To call for the records leading to Ext.P8, P10 and P12 and quash the same by the issuance of a writ of certiorari or appropriate writ direction or order.

(ii) To declare that