Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
V. Kameswar Rao, Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, JJ
R D Thakur – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background regarding the demand for parity in superannuation age. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. contention of parties regarding the feasibility and administrative rationale of the age increase. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 3. court holds that superannuation age is a policy matter beyond judicial mandate. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
JUDGMENT
V. KAMESWAR RAO, J.
1. This writ petition was been filed by two petitioners. During the course of hearing on 27.02.2026, we were informed that the Registry of this Court is in receipt of a letter addressed to the petitioners counsel/Mr. Ankur Chhibber, wherein the petitioner no. 1 namely Dr. Debajyoti Chakraborty has stated that, for medical reasons, he does not wish to pursue this petition. Accordingly, his name was deleted from the array of parties, with petitioner No.2/Dr. R. D. Thakur, as the petitioner.
2. This petition has been filed with the following prayers:-
“(i) Issue a writ of certiorari quashing speaking order dated 03.07.2023 issued by the respondents;
(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus to forthwith enhance the superannuation age of Doctors/Medical Officers
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
