R. C. Lahoti, J. - (1.) The facts relevant for the purpose of deciding this appeal are undisputed and are briefly set out hereafter. N.S. Giri, the appellant joined the services of erstwhile Mangalore Municipality as a Health Assistant in the year 1950. He was promoted as Sanitary Inspector in the year 1962 and as a Selection Grade Sanitary Inspector with effect from 1-6-1967. The post has been re-designated as Assistant Health Officer. The Mangalore City Municipality was constituted under the then Madras District Municipalities Act, 1920 (renamed in the year 1969 as the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, 1920).
(2.) In the year 1968, an industrial dispute between the workmen and the management of Mangalore City Municipality was referred to a sole arbitrator under Section 10A of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The dispute referred to was:whether the age of superannuation of 55 years of the employees of Mangalore City Municipality including those whose services were extended or of those who were re-employed after the age of 50 years should be fixed at 58 years. The arbitrator gave an award on 11-1-1969 (published in the Mysore Gazette dated 13-2-1969) enhancing the age of retirement of the workmen belonging to the 'superior service' from 55 years to completion of 58 years of age including those whose services were extended or who were re-employed after the age of 55 years. The admitted case of both the parties as noted in the award itself has been that the workmen (including the appellant) whose dispute was before the arbitrator were classified as superior servants and under the statutory service rules as then applicable the age of superannuation was 55 years. However, the arbitrator had thought it fair to fix the age of superannuation at 58 years. Consistently with such opinion formed by the arbitrator the award was given.
(3.) On 31-12-1980 the appellant received a communication from the Karnataka Municipal Corporation, informing the appellant that he was to retire with effect from 31-12-1980 (afternoon) in view of his having attained the age of superannuation, i.e., 55 years. On 17-1-1981, the appellant filed a writ petition which was allowed by the learned single Judge quashing the order of retirement forming an opinion that the award was binding between the parties. The Municipal Corporation preferred an appeal before the Division Bench of Karnataka High Court which has been allowed reversing the judgment of the learned single Judge. The Division Bench has formed an opinion that the award to the extent to which it was inconsistent with the statutory provisions governing the service conditions of the appellant, including the age of retirement could not be given effect to. The aggrieved appellant has filed this appeal by special leave.;