AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
5 paragraphs · 209 wordsM.S. Ramachandra Rao CJ
In this Writ petition, the petitioner challenges notification dt.10.05.2001 issued by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, amending Rule 56 of the Fundamental Rules by inserting a proviso thereto stating that Class-IV Government Servants would retire from service on attaining the age of 58 years. Thus the age of superannuation was reduced from 60 years, prior to notification, to the age of 58 years, after the notification.
In K. Nagaraj & Others vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and another1985 SCC(1) 523, the Supreme Court has held that fixation of age of superannuation of employees is within the purview of the State Government and it is a policy decision, and ordinarily the Court should not interfere with the same. The said decision had been followed by the Division Bench of this Court in Krishan Chand Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and another [2010(1) Shim.LC 351=Latest HLJ 2010 (1) 414 (HP)] and the impugned notification dt.10.05.2001 was upheld by the Division Bench of this Court in 2010.
Since the petitioner is assailing the same notification and since the judgment in Krishan Chand’s case (supra) is binding on this Bench, following the same, the CWPOA is dismissed. No costs.
All pending applications stand disposed of accordingly.