( 1 ) THIS is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution which has been presented to this court by a Railway clerk who has been given notice by the Railway authorities that he will have to retire on the attainment of 55 years of ago.

( 2 ) NOW, our attention has been drawn to a recent change in the State Railway Establishment code, vol. II. Sub-rule (2) (a) of Rule 2046 of that "code lays down that : "a ministerial servant who is not governed by Sub-clause (b) may be required to retire at the age of 55 years, but should ordinarily be retained in service, if he continues efficient, up to the age of 60 years. He must not be retained after that age except in very special circumstances, which, must be recorded in writing, and with the sanction of the competent authority. "

( 3 ) THE point which has been urged is that a right has been conferred under this rule on an employee to be retained in service till the age of 60. That right, however, is subject to the reservation that he must be efficient. Dr. Asthanas argument is that the word "ordinarily" restricts the discretion of the Railway authorities and that they are, except where the employee is inefficient, expected