High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Nand Kishore Singh v. U.P. State Electricity Board & Others - WRIT - A No. 13758 of 1997  RD-AH 18445 (1 November 2006)
Court No. 37
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 13758 of 1977
Nand Kishor Singh........................................................Petitioner
U.P. State Electricity Board & others ............................Respondents
Hon'ble Ashok Bhushan, J.
Heard counsel for the parties.
Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged.
By this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the notice dated 26.12.1996 informing that petitioner shall attain the age of superannuation on 30th June, 1997 after attaining the age of 58 years. The writ petition was filed challenging the said order. This Court vide an interim order dated 5th May, 1997 stayed the retirement notice. The writ petitioner continued to work as Assistant Teacher. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher in C.T. grade in the Higher Secondary School Obera on 10th July, 1967. The said institution is run by the U.P. State Electricity Board and is recognised institution under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and receiving grant in aid from the State Government . Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the age of retirement of the Assistant Teacher working in the recognised institution is sixty years and the U.P. State Electricity Board could not have issued retirement notice to the petitioner for retirement at the age of 58 years. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment of this Court dated 4.10.2002 passed in writ petition No. 2422 of 1999, copy of which has been filed as Annexure R. A. l to the rejoinder affidavit which writ petition related to a teacher of same institution. This Court quashed the retirement notice given to the teacher for retirement at the age of 58 years, this Court held in the said judgement that the petitioner of that case was entitled to continue till the age of sixty years. The facts of this case is fully covered by the aforesaid judgment dated 4.10.2002. Petitioner having already retired after completion of age of sixty years on 30th June, 1999, the respondents may finalise the retirement benefits of the petitioner as admissible in accordance with law.
In the result the impugned notice dated 26.12.1996 is quashed. It is held that the petitioner was entitled to continue till 30th June, 1999 and is also entitled for his retirement benefits treating his age of retirement as 30th June, 1999.
With the aforesaid direction the writ petition is disposed of.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.