S.C. SHARMA, J.

( 1. ) Regard being had to the similitude of the controversy involved in both the writ petitions, they were heard analogously together and disposed of by this singular order. For the sake of convenience, the facts stated in Writ Petition 590 of 2001 are exposited herein.

( 2. ) The petitioner-before this Court who was a teacher working at Carmel Convent School has filed this present petition challenging the order of Management deted 01st January, 2001, by which, he was informed that he shall be retired on completing 58 years of age on 01st February, 2001. The contention of the petitioner is that respondent no 1 society, is a registered society under the provisions of Societies Registrikaran Adhiniyam, 1973 and is running a school in the name and style Carmel Convent Senior Secondary School, Gwalior. It has been further contended that the school in question is affiliated to the Central Board of Secondary Education, New Delhi and the society as well as the school as per terms and conditions of affiliation are liable to follow the regulations framed by the Central Board of Secondary Education. It has been further stated by the petitioner that the byelaws of the Central Board of Secondary Education provides that a school which is affiliated with the Central Board of Secondary Education shall also frame rules in consonance with the Service Rules which are applicable in respect of employees of aided and unaided schools of the State Government/Union territories. It has been further contended by the petitioner that in the State of Madhya Pradesh retirement age of a teacher in the school of the State Government is 62 years and, therefore, as per byelaws of the Central Board of Secondary Education, he is entitled for continuance upto the age of 62 years. The petitioner has, thus, prayed for quashing of the notice dated 01st January, 2001 and also the subsequent order dated 31.01.2001, by which, he has been superannuated from services on completion of 58 years of age on 01.02.2001 and also prayed for pay and allowances along with reinstatement in service.

( 3. ) The respondent no. 1 to 4 have filed a reply and it has been stated that Carmel Convent School is a private school which is being run by respondent no. 1 - society and which is not receiving any financial aid from the Central Government or from the State Government. It has been further stated that the institution does not fall within the meaning of "State" as defined under Article 12 of the Constitution of India and, therefore, is not amenable to writ jurisdiction by this Court. Not only this, the respondents have relied upon a judgment delivered by this Court in the case of LaL Singh vs. The Chairman School Administration Board, B.S.F. Tekanpur. Gwalior (M.P. No. 996/1991), wherein, in similar circumstances, where a school was being run by a society not receiving grant-in- aid was impleaded as one of the respondent and it has been held by this Court that such an institution is a private body and therefore no writ lies against a private body.

( 4. ) The petitioner has subsequently filed a rejoinder and it has been stated, in the rejoinder that the institution in question as it is discharging the public duties is certainly amenable to writ jurisdiction of this Court. The petitioner has relied upon a judgment delivered by this Court in the case of Narendra Pal Singh vs. M.P. Dugdh Mahasangh, Bhopal reported in 1993 (2) M.P.J.R. Page 20. It has been further contended that the Carmel Convent School is affiliated with the Central Board of Secondary Education and as per byelaw 30, petitioner is entitled for continuance upto the same age at par with the employees of aided / unaided schools of the State of Madhya Pradesh. The petitioner has also relied upon a judgment delivered by this Court in W.P. No. 1273 of 1997 (Smt. Nirmalal Gangajaliwale vs. Management of Carmel Convent School, Gwalior) decided on 27th July, 2001, wherein the similar institution was held to be