Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 944 (ALL)

KALIKA RAM v. STATE OF U. P.

2002-08-01

RAKESH TIWARI

body2002
RAKESH TIWARI, J. ( 1 ) HEARD the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents and perused the records. ( 2 ) THIS writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned order with notice of retirement dated 26th June, 1998 retiring him at the age of 58 years, Annexure-1 to the writ petition. The second relief sought by means of this writ petition is for issuing mandamus directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to continue in service in the department till he attains the age of 60 years i. e. , 31. 5. 2000. ( 3 ) THE facts of the case are that petitioners date of birth is 6. 5. 40 and he is High School fail. Reliance has been placed on the G. O. No. G-496/das-534 (19)-57 Lucknow, dated 28th July, 1987. By this G. O. Fundamental Rule 56 (A) was amended and it is contended that by virtue of the aforesaid amendment, the petitioner is entitled to continue in service till he attains the age of 60 years and his pre-mature retirement at the age of 58 years is illegal, arbitrary and amounts. . (VERNACULAR MATTER OMMITED ). . ( 4 ) A perusal of Clause-I of the aforesaid amended G. O. makes it crystal clear that the age of retirement of all the Government servants is 58 years, but, those employees, who were appointed in Group-D prior to November 5, 1985, would retire at the age of 60 years. The petitioner was appointed as Chaukidar/cleaner as Class-IV employee in the pay scales of Rs. 305-5-330-EB-6-360-EB-390 in the office of the Executive Engineer, Nalkoop Prakhand, ghazipur vide order dated 20/21-7-1989. He was confirmed on the said post vide order dated 1. 4. 1994. Thus, the petitioner was appointed after 5th of November, 1985. His case falls in clause-I of the aforesaid amended G. O. dated 28th July, 1987. ( 5 ) IN these circumstances petitioners age of superannuation would be 58 years under Clause-I of the G. O. dated 28th July, 1987. He is not entitled to continue in service till he attains the age of 60 years as he was appointed in service after 5th November, 1985. ( 6 ) FOR the reasons stated above, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. .