SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(SC) 407

SUPREME COURT
Surya Kant, C. J., R. Mahadevan, Joymalya Bagchi, JJ.
Ranjeet Kumar v. State of Jharkhand


1. The petitioner is a Principal District and Sessions Judge at Hazaribagh, Jharkhand. The service conditions of Members of the Superior Judicial Service, like him, are governed under the Jharkhand Superior Judicial Service (Recruitment, Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2001, which has been notified in exercise of powers conferred by Art.233 read with Art.309 of the Constitution of India. Under these Rules, no age of superannuation as such has been prescribed, but R.29 of Chapter III, which defines "conditions of service", provides that all such matters relating to conditions of service of the officers appointed under these Rules and not specified herein shall be governed by the General Rules in this behalf. It is not in dispute that the age of retirement of the State Civil Officers in the State of Jharkhand is 60 years. By virtue of R.29, the age of superannuation of Members of the Superior Judicial Services, thus, will also be taken as 60 years. The direction sought by the petitioner for enhancement of the age of retirement to 61 or 62 years essentially requires a policy decision and consequential amendment in the Service Rules. We are aware that in some of the State






Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top