JUDGMENT : RAKESH SHARMA, J. 1. Since the common question of law and facts are involved in this bunch of writ petitions, the same has been heard together and is decided through this common judgment. 2. Heard Sri S.C. Pandey, Sri V. Kumar holding brief of Sri D.P.S. Chauhan and Sri Nirdesh Kumar Dixit, learned Counsel for the Petitioners, Sri Ashok Pandey, learned standing counsel and Sri I. P. Singh, Sri C. P. Misra, Sri A. R. Khan, Sri Rakesh Kumar and Sri N. A. Siddiqui, learned Counsel for the opposite parties. 3. These writ petitions have been filed by the Secretaries/Cadre Sachiv working in Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies of U. P. Petitioners have sought enhancement of their age of superannuation from 58 years to 60 years. According to them, they cannot be retired from the service on attaining the age of 58 years like the employees of other Cooperative Societies, Cooperative Bank, the Petitioners should have also been allowed to continue till they attain the age of 60 years. 4. Sri S.C. Pandey, learned Counsel for some of the Petitioners has taken this Court to various provisions contained in U. P. Cooperative Societies Act, U. P. Cooperative Employees Service Regulation, 1975, U. P. Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies Centralized Services Rules, 1976 and various rules and model bye-laws and Sections 120, 121A and 122B of the above Act in support of his submissions that the Petitioners are being discriminated as in the same Department, i.e., Cooperative Department, Government of U. P., the Secretaries are being allowed to continue in service upto the age of 60 years. There has to be a uniform policy in respect of the age of superannuation of cooperative societies employees and the employees working in the public sector undertakings. The action taken by the opposite parties to retire the Petitioners on attaining the age of 58 years is contrary to constitutional mandate and the present policy of the State Government. He has cited a letter/circular issued on 23.11.2004 by the U. P. Cooperative Institutional Services Board, Lucknow addressed to the Secretaries, General Managers and Managing Directors of the Apex Cooperative Bodies in the State of U. P. whereby these authorities were informed that the State Government is going to raise the age of superannuation and the Rule 24 contained in U. P. Cooperative Societies Employees Service Regulation, 1975 was accordingly amended on 30.10.2004. Similar amendment is also required in Rule 29 of U. P. Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies by which the Petitioner's services are governed. The existing unamended Rule 29 of U. P. Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies Centralized Services Rules, 1976 is contrary to Regulation, 1975 and the public policy. This amounts to denial to equal and fair treatment to the cadre of Secretaries of U. P. Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies to which the Petitioners belong to. The Registrar, Cooperative Societies, had recommended their matter to the State Government vide letters dated 20.6.2005 and 28.6.2005. 5. Sri S.C. Pandey has cited chronology of events to demonstrate that a statement was made in this Court also by a senior Secretary to the Government when a special appeal filed by the Petitioners was being dealt with that the decision in respect of enhancement of age was being taken at the highest level of the State Government. 6. As per the learned Counsel for the Petitioners, the existing unamended Rule 29 of U. P. Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies Centralized Services Rules, 1976 and Regulation 27 framed thereunder are contrary to the Rule 24 of U. P. Cooperative Societies Employees Service Regulation, 1975 and the public policy. The whole action of retiring the Petitioners on their attaining the age of 58 years is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. 7. Sri D.P.S. Chauhan, learned Counsel for some of the Petitioners has also made similar submissions. 8. Sri Ashok Pande, learned standing counsel, Sri I. P. Singh, Sri A. R. Khan, Sri Rakesh Kumar, Sri N. A. Siddiqui and Sri C. P. Misra appearing for the District Administrative Committees, Cadre Authorities and other cooperative bodies, have resisted the writ petitions. According to them, the Petitioners are Secretaries/Cadre Sachivs of Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies. They belong to centralized service and their service conditions are governed by the "U. P. Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies Centralized Services Rules, 1976". The Petitioners have been superannuated from the services on attaining the age of 58 years as per the provision contained in Rule 29 of the U. P. Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies Centralized Services Rules, 1976. Rule 29 governs the service conditions of the Petitioners and specifically provides that the age of superannuation for the posts held by the Petitioners is 58 years (not 60 years as alleged by them). 9. Rule 29 governs the service conditions of the Petitioners and specifically provides that the age of superannuation for the posts held by the Petitioners is 58 years (not 60 years as alleged by them). 9. In compliance of this Court's order the learned standing counsel for the State of U. P., has produced record before the Court which shows that the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Lucknow had initiated a move to enhance the age of superannuation of Secretaries/Cadre Secretaries of U. P. Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies, Cadre Secretaries to 60 years but the State Government after considering the matter has taken policy decision to maintain the age of superannuation of such secretaries as 58 years. The decision of the State Government was duly communicated to the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Lucknow vide letter dated 29.9.2006. Thus, on 29.9.2006, the controversy has been set at rest by the State Government. The record further reveals that a policy decision has already been taken on 30.6.2004 to declare the cadre of the Petitioners as dying cadre. 10. After a detailed consideration upto the highest level of the State Government, as is evident from the record, a policy decision has already been taken by the State Government not to enhance the age of superannuation of the P.A.C.S. Secretaries. The Government order dated 29.9.2006 has already been placed on record alongwith the counter-affidavit filed in the connected W.P. No. 534 (SS) of 2007. 11. The learned Counsel appearing for the opposite parties have also placed before the Court the following three judgments of this Court by which the controversy raised in these writ petitions has already been concluded and set at rest. The Petitioners in these writ petitions cannot be permitted to re-agitate the same issues. 1. Civil Misc. W.P. No. 74749 of 2005, Girraj Prasad Sharma v. State of U. P. and Ors. ; 2. Civil Misc. W.P. No. 55499 of 2004, Chandra Kiran Tyagi v. State of U. P. and Ors. ; and 3. W.P. No. 572 (S/S) of 2006, Ram Gopal Tripathi v. Zila Prashashnik Committee and Ors. 12. I have considered the arguments of the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. 13. This Court has already dealt with the dispute raised by the Petitioners and passed detailed judgments and orders in the writ petitions which have been indicated above. W.P. No. 572 (S/S) of 2006, Ram Gopal Tripathi v. Zila Prashashnik Committee and Ors. 12. I have considered the arguments of the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. 13. This Court has already dealt with the dispute raised by the Petitioners and passed detailed judgments and orders in the writ petitions which have been indicated above. It is admitted to the Petitioners that their service conditions are governed by the U. P. Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies Centralized Service Regulations, 1976. It has been provided in Rule 29 of Regulation, 1976, as it stands today, that the age of superannuation of the Secretaries is 58 years. This rule has not been amended so far. The letter dated 29.6.2006 spelt out its policy decision that the State Government shall not enhance the age of superannuation of the P.A.C.S. Secretaries from 58 years to 60 years. The relevant record produced by the learned standing counsel also reveals that the State Government has considered the matter at length at all the levels. The State Government has appreciated the fact that P.A.C.S. cadre has already been declared as a dying cadre vide notification dated 30.6.2004 and about 1,430 Societies have been closed down. The State Government was unable to manage for payment of salaries to such Secretaries out of its existing funds allocated to the Cooperative Department. Various other factors were also considered by the concerned appropriate administrative authorities of the Government while taking a final decision in the matter of enhancement of age of superannuation of P.A.C.S. Secretaries. 14. As per record placed in the Court that there is no illegality in the decision making process and final decision taken by the State Government in retaining the present age of superannuation of the Secretaries of U. P. Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies. Thus, it cannot be said that the decision taken by the State Government was arbitrary or mala fide. The Petitioners have been superannuated from the services on attaining the age of superannuation of 58 years as per the statutory provisions contained in Rule 29 of U. P. Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies Centralized Services Rules, 1976, which governs the service conditions of the Petitioners. The above mentioned Rule 29 has not been amended till date. The State Government by making statutory rules can fix the age of superanuation (Vide K. Nagaraj and Others Vs. The above mentioned Rule 29 has not been amended till date. The State Government by making statutory rules can fix the age of superanuation (Vide K. Nagaraj and Others Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and Another, AIR 1985 SC 551 ) 15. The learned Counsel for the Petitioners have failed to demonstrate that the service regulations and the policy adopted by the State Government violate any recognized norms of employment or the same is irrational. The State Government is fully empowered to reduce or enhance the age of superannuation of its employees by making statutory rules vide Tej Bahadur Ram Vs. State of U.P. and Others, (2006) 7 SCC 660 . In the present case, Rule 29 of the U. P. Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies Centralized Service Rules, 1976, which govern the age of superannuation, is in vogue, unchallenged and the same still holds the fields. 16. In view of above discussion and in the light of the judgments passed by the Division Bench and Hon. single Judges of this Court, these writ petitions are devoid of merit and the same are dismissed.