JUDGMENT K.A. Abdul Gafoor, J. 1. The petitioner is an employee of the first respondent, Textiles Committee constituted under the Textiles Committee Act, 1963. He is working as Inspector. He has attained the age of 58 years on 31-8-98. He has approached this court on 27-8-1998 challenging Ext. P3 whereby he is informed that he is to retire on superannuation. He submits that, Govt. of India accepting the report of the 5th Pay Commission issued orders on 13-5-98 enhancing the retirement age of all the Central Government employees. Govt. of India also issued Ext. P2 office memorandum with respect to the raising of age of retirement of autonomous bodies and organisations of Central Government to 60 years on par with the Central Government employees. Therefore the petitioner submits that the petitioner shall retire only on attaining the age of 60 years. It is also contended by the petitioner that the Textile Committee Employees (Condition of Service) Regulations, 1971 had been amended by the textile committee enhancing retirement to 60 years and has been sent to Govt. for publication in gazette. It is further contended that there is already previous sanction to all similar organisations as contained in Ext. P2. Merely because there is delay on the part of the Central Government in publishing such amendment, the petitioner shall not be deprived of the right to continue in service until 60 years of age. So the petitioner challenges Ext. P5 whereby he is informed to retire on superannuation and seeks a direction to continue him in service until he attain the age of 60 years. It is contended by the counsel for the respondents that the conditions of the service of the petitioner is totally covered by Textile Committee Employees (Conditions of Service) Regulations, 1971 which provides as per Clause.13 thereof as follows: "The maximum age upto which an employee may be retained in the service of the Committee is 58 years excepting class IV employees for whom the retiring age will be 60 years, provided, however that extension of service upto the age of 60 years may be given to the Technical Staff at the discretion of the Committee." The amendment of the said clause has not so far taken effect as Govt. of India has not so far approved and published the same. Unless it is published the amendment will not take effect. of India has not so far approved and published the same. Unless it is published the amendment will not take effect. Therefore as on 31-8-98 and even on today the age of retirement of the employees of the first respondent committee is only 58 years. Therefore the petitioner shall retire. 2. Ext. P2 is a Govt. memorandum. That memorandum express the intention of the Central Govt. to raise the age of retirement of Central Autonomous bodies and organisations. In para.2(b) of Ext. P2, it is ordered as follows: "In cases where the existing rules of the relevant autonomous bodies/ organisations provided either that the age of retirement of specified categories of personnel working in these organisations shall be same as corresponding categories/grades in the Central Government or where the existing rules provided that all the conditions of service shall be identical to corresponding category of personnel in the Central Government, the age of retirement may be increased by two years from prospective effect subject to a maximum of 60 years, in consultation with the concerned administrative ministry except in cases where the age of retirement in these organisations is already more compared to their counterparts in the Central Government. There shall be complete ban on extension in service beyond the age of superannuation except in the case of medical and scientific specialists who can be granted extension in service on a case to case basis upto the age of 62 years and orders relating to increase in age of retirement shall not be applicable to the person on extension in service on 1-5-98." Therefore the Central Government had given previous sanction to all such organisations to amend the regulations relating to conditions of service to raise the age of retirement to 60 years. That is the intention of the Govt. It is in tune with that, the Textile Committee in its meeting held on 29-6-1998 approved amendment to regulation No. 13 extracted above, raising the age of retirement of its employees to 60 years. Such an amendment has been made by the Textiles Committee is an admitted fact in the counter affidavit as revealed by the averment in para.4 of the counter affidavit. But that amendment has to be approved by the Ministry of Textiles and published in the gazette. That is only a formal thing. When the Govt. have published its policy as contained in Ext. But that amendment has to be approved by the Ministry of Textiles and published in the gazette. That is only a formal thing. When the Govt. have published its policy as contained in Ext. P2 concerning the employees of autonomous bodies and organisations under the Govt. of India, there arise no question of any variation, so long as Ext. P2 stands, unless it is against the provisions in the Textile Committee Act. Increasing of age of retirement from 58 to 60 years in no way contravenes any of the provisions in the Textile Committee Act. In the decision of the Supreme Court reported in Vimalakumary v. State of Haryana and Others (JT 1998 (2) SC 111) it has been held that: "Recourse to such draft rules is permissible for the interregnum to meet the emergent situation." When the Govt. of India in Ext. P2 unequivocally allowed the autonomous bodies and organisations in the Central Sector to amend their respective regulations to increase the age of retirement to 60 years, an interregnum between that Govt. memorandum and the mere publication of an amendment shall always be covered by such amended rules which give a benefit to the employees. Therefore the petitioner is perfectly justified in his claim that he is entitled to continue until the age of 60 years in service. Original Petition is allowed. No order as to costs.