IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
V.K. Khanna, M.C. Agarwal, JJ.
Vishwanath Lal Srivastava - Appellant
Vs.
Sahayak Shiksha Nideshak (Basic) Vth Region And Another - Respondents
Civil Misc. Writ No. 29102 of 1992
Decided On : 06-08-1992
RETIREMENT AGE - FUNDAMENTAL RULES, RULE 56(A) - U. P. FUNDAMENTAL (FIRST AMENDMENT) RULES, 1987 - AGE OF SUPERANNUATION - EXTENSION OF SERVICE - DISCRIMINATION - ARTICLE 14 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA - INTERPRETATION OF RULE 56(A) - APPLICABILITY OF PROVISO TO RULE 56(A) - GROUP 'D' EMPLOYEES - CLERICAL SERVICE.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a clerk in the office of the Regional Assistant Director of Education, Varanasi, challenged the order of his retirement at the age of 58 years, contending that he should retire at the age of 60 years as per the prevalent rules.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the age of superannuation for government servants in general is 58 years, with the government having the power to grant an extension in exceptional cases if public interest so requires. The court further held that the proviso to Rule 56(A), which exempts group 'D' employees recruited prior to 5-11-1985 from the general rule and allows them to retire at the age of 60 years, is not applicable to the petitioner as he was in the clerical service, which comes in group 'C or class III.
Issues: 1. Whether the power reserved in Rule 56(A) by the Government to grant extension to any employees is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India? 2. Whether the proviso to Rule 56(A) applies to the petitioner, who was in the clerical service?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the power reserved in Rule 56(A) by the Government to grant extension to any employees is not arbitrary as it has a built-in mechanism to check arbitrariness. Extension is by way of a rare exception and can be granted only when public interest so demands and the prior written approval of the government is required. 2. The court held that the proviso to Rule 56(A) applies only to group 'D' employees, who are also known as class IV employees, and not to the petitioner, who was in the clerical service, which comes in group 'C or class III.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition, holding that the petitioner was due to retire on 31-7-1992 upon attaining the age of 58 years.
M.C. Agarwal, J.
This writ petition seeks the relief of quashing of an order dated 10-7-1992 by which the Petitioner has been informed that he would retire from service on 31st July 1992, having attained the age of 58 years It is further prayed that the Respondents be directed to treat the Petitioner in service till he attains the age of 60 years.
2. We have heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself in accordance with the Rules of the Court.
3. The Petitioner was employed as a Clerk in the office of the Regional Assistant Director of Education, Varanasi His date of birth is 28-7-1934 and he entered government service on 12-6-1956. According to him, as per the prevalent Rules, he should retire from government service on attaining the age of sixty years. No such rule has been mentioned in the writ petition or in the affidavit annexed thereto nor was cited before us at the time of arguments. The Petitioner has annexed to the petition a copy of Government order dated 26-7-1987 by which the U. P. Fundamental (First Amendment) Rules, 1987 were promulgated- This is Annexure I to the writ petition. It is printed at page 146 of Manual of Uttar Pradesh Government Orders by Har Swarup Nigam, 1992 edition. The Government Order is in Hindi and the relevant portion thereof by which Rule 56(A) of the Fundamental Rules has been amended with effect from 5-11-1985 is as below:
56 (ka)--Is niyam ke anya khanda me anyatha upabandhit ke sabaya pratyek sarkari sebak us mas me jisme wah attawan barsa ke aayu prapta kare. antim din aparhan me seba nibrit hoga (use adbiwarsta par seba nibritta ke dinank ke paschat sarkar ke purba swrikitl se Lok adhar par jise abhilikhit kiya jayega. Seba me rakha ja sakta hai. Kintu ati bishesh paristhitiyon ke sibaya use sath barsh ke aayu ke paschat seba me nehi rakba jana chahiya.
Parantu parch November 1985 ke purba bharti kiya gaya aur samuh "gha" pad ko dharan karne wala koi sarkari sebak us mas ke jisme woh sath barsh ke aayu prapta kare antim din aprahn me seva se nibrit hoga.
Spastikarar--Upyukta parantuk un mamlon par lagu nehi hoga jahan ukta parantuk me nirdhist pad/padon ko prasthist me 27 February 1982 ke paschat paribartan kiy gaya ho aur uchchatar samoh ke pad/padon me bargikrit kiya gaya ho.
The English translation of the amended rule, as we understand it, would be as under:
56 (A) Except as otherwise provided in the other parts of this rule, every government servant shall retire from service in the afternoon of the last day of the month in which he attains the age of fifty eight years. He can be retained in service after the date of retirement on superannuation only in public interest on the prior approval of the government which shall be recorded in writing, but except in very special circumstances he should not be retained in service after the age of sixty years.
Provided that a government servant of group 'D' recruited prior to 5th of November, 1985 shall retire in the afternoon of the last day of the month in which he attain the age of sixty years:
Explanation: The above proviso will not be applicable to those cases where any. change has taken place after the 27th February 1982 in the status of the past/posts specified in the above proviso and classified as post/posts of higher group.
The above rule would show (i) that the age of superannuation of government servants in general is 58 years; (ii) the government has reserved to itself the power to grant an extension in exceptional cases if public interest so require?; (iii) employees of Group 'D' who were recruited prior to 5-11- 1985 have been exempted from the general rule and would retire on attaining the age of 6o years; and (iv) an employee, though recruited as a group 'D' employee, who has ceased to be a group 'D' employee because of up gradation of the post, cannot take the advantage of the proviso; in other words he would be governed by the main rule and retire on a
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.