Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
T.R.RAVI, J
Peter P.P. S/o Paul P.P. – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. In both these writ petitions, the employees of the Kerala State Warehousing Corporation are seeking permission to continue in service after 30.05.2025, which is their date of superannuation based on the present rule. The retirement age fixed is 58 years. It is submitted that the enhancement of the retirement age from 58 to 60 is pending consideration of the State Government and the prayer is to permit the petitioners to continue till a decision is taken.
2. In similar circumstances, this Court by judgment dated 08.04.2025 in WP (C) No. 14707/2025 disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the State Government to consider the resolution passed by the Board of Directors of the Kerala State Warehousing Corporation for approval, if the same is pending before the Government preferably within two months.
3. In the above circumstances, these writ petitions can also be disposed of in the same line. These writ petitions are disposed of directing the State Government to consider whether or not to approve the Board resolution of the 3rd respondent, at the earliest.
Court directed the State Government to expedite consideration of the Board resolution regarding the enhancement of retirement age for employees.
Employees lack entitlement to enforce governmental decisions on retirement policy; continuation in service pending governmental approval is warranted.
The Board of Directors of a Company holds the authority to determine service conditions, including retirement age, without mandatory state approval.
The determination of superannuation age is a policy decision of the government, requiring its approval for amendments, and courts cannot intervene without legal authority.
The enhancement of the age of superannuation requires governmental approval and is a matter of policy.
The enhancement of retirement age is a policy decision of the government, not a right of employees, and cannot be mandated by the court.
The enhancement of retirement age is a policy decision of the government, and employees cannot claim a right to continue in service pending such a decision.
Employer's prerogative in setting retirement age is affirmed, requiring Government reconsideration of employee age enhancement without clear rationale.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the applicability of G.O.Ms.No.15, dtd. 31/1/2022, which enhanced the age of superannuation of Government Employees from 60 years to 62 years, t....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
