CourtKutchehry.com
High Courts

Ram Bodh Dubey vs State of U.P.and Others

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 15 July 2002 · Citation: (2002) 07 AHC CK 0087

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sushil Harkauli, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 6573 of 2000(S/S)
Download PDFAsk AI about this case

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

4 paragraphs · 167 words

S. Harkauli, J.—On 2372001 the Standing Counsel was granted four weeks �and no more� for filing counteraffidavit. Despite that order no counteraffidavit has been filed. Thus, the averments in the writ petition remain uncontroverted.

2.

In view of the averment made in the writ petition, the petitioner who has retired as Medical Attendant which is GroupD post, was entitled to be continued in service up to the age of 60 years. The pay revision referred to in the impugned order (Annexure 1) cannot be the basis of denial of that benefit as held by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Mohd. Umar v. State of U.P., 1995 (13) LCD 1220.

3.

In the circumstances, impugned order dated 16102000 (Annexure 1 to the petition) is quashed. The retirement age of the petitioner will be treated as sixty years and post retirement benefits will also be calculated treating the petitioner superannuation age to be sixty years.

4.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.