Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, M.B. SNEHALATHA
A. Sathyan, S/o. C. Ayyappan – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala, Represented by Secretary to Government, Ayush Department, Government Secretariat – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's request for age increase. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. single judge's ruling on no indefeasible right. (Para 4) |
| 3. need for review of single judge's decision. (Para 6) |
| 4. arguments regarding employment and age limits. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. discretion of hospital authorities in employment age. (Para 9 , 10 , 13) |
| 6. writ of mandamus and its legal basis. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 7. conclusion of dismissal of writ appeal. (Para 14) |
JUDGMENT :
M.B. Snehalatha, J.
This Writ Appeal under Section 5(i) of the KERALA HIGH COURT ACT , 1958 is directed challenging the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 4.4.2005 in W.P(C) No.18190 of 2024.
2. The appellant-petitioner herein filed the Writ Petition (C) No.18190 of 2024 invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of certiorari and to quash Ext.P7 Government order dated 8.5.2024 on the ground that the said order was issued by the 1st respondent State without considering Ext.P2 to P4, as directed in Ext.P6 judgment dated 15.03.2024 in W.P.(C) No.6337 of 2024 and to declare that daily wage employees under the Hospital Development Society (HDS) in the hospitals under the 2nd respond
Daily wage employees under Hospital Development Society lack an indefeasible right to continue employment until age 65; discretion lies with the hospital authority.
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....
The Board of Directors of a Company holds the authority to determine service conditions, including retirement age, without mandatory state approval.
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.
The enhancement of retirement age is a policy decision of the government, not a right of employees, and cannot be mandated by the court.
Government Orders increasing retirement age do not apply to private school employees, as employment contracts govern such matters.
Age restriction on contract employees must align with government directives allowing continuation until age 65.
Contract employees are entitled to continue service until age 65 according to applicable government orders.
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
