R. Subramanian, J.

1. This Intra Court Appeal at the instance of the appellants challenges the order of the learned Single Judge made in WP No.7383 of 2017, wherein, the appellants' prayer for issue of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to continue the petitioners in service till they reach the age of 60 years, pay salary and other benefits including pensionary benefits on par with the other employees working in the respondent Corporation.

2. The facts that led to the filing of the Writ Petition are as follows:

The appellants were working in various capacities in Loss Prevention Association of India Ltd., which is a Company fully owned by the General Insurance Corporation of India and its four subsidiaries. The General Insurance Corporation of India and its subsidiaries were nationalized by enactment of General Insurance Business (Nationalisation) Act, 1972. The seven Insurance Companies which were subscribers/share holders of Loss Prevention Association of India Ltd., were amalgamated with the General Insurance Corporation and its subsidiaries by virtue of the General Insurance Business (Nationalisation) Act, 1972. However, the Loss Prevention Association of India Ltd., continued to be an independent entity. On 27.05.1998, the Central Government issued a notification altering the age of retirement of the employees of the General Insurance Industry, covering all the nationalised Insurance Companies from 58 to 60. The Loss Prevention Association of India Ltd., which was the subsidiary of the Insurance Companies, continued to retain 58 as the age of retirement of its employees, despite the change having been made by the Government, in respect of the employees of the General Insurance Industry.

3. A Scheme of Amalgamation was proposed in order to merge the Loss Prevention Association of India Ltd., with the General Insurance Corporation of India. The said Scheme of Amalgamation, among other things provided for transfer of employees from Loss Prevention Association of India Limited to the other General Insurance Companies, viz. General Insurance Corporation of India (GIC), National Insurance Company Limited (NIC), the New India Assurance Company Limited (NIA), the Oriental Insurance Company Limited (OIC) and United India Insurance Company Limited (UIIC). Clause 9 of the Scheme of Amalgamation, which provides for transfer of employees, reads as follows:

"On the Scheme becoming effective, the services of the workmen and employees of the Transferor Company (LPA) in service on the Effecting Dates shall stand transferred to (1) GIC, (2) NIC, (3) NIA, (4) OIC and (5) UIIC as set out in Annexure-I, Annexure-II, Annexure-III, Annexure-IV and Annexure-V respectively. The terms and conditions on which such employees whose services shall stand transferred (hereinafter referred to as the Transferred Employees are as set out in each of the Annexure-I, Annexure-II, Annexure-III, Annexure-IV and Annexure-V above. Upon the Scheme becoming effective, the services of the Transferred Employees shall stand transferred to GIC, NIC, NIA, OIC and UIIC, as provided herein above on such terms and conditions which shall continue to apply to such transferred employees though such terms and conditions may be at variance with the terms and conditions of the existing employees of each of GIC, NIC, NIA, OIC and UIIC."

4. This Scheme of Amalgamation was approved by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, by an order dated 27.04.2007. Pursuant to the said order of approving the amalgamation, the United India Insurance Company Ltd., viz. the 2nd respondent herein, issued letters offering appointment to the employees of the Loss Prevention Association of India Limited. All these letters specifically stated that the age of superannuation, would be 58 years (as is specified in annexure) and the offers of appointment also required the employee to indicate his/her acceptance by signing the said letter and returning it to the Company. It is not in dispute t