Satyendra Singh Chauhan, J. - (1.) HEARD Learned Counsel for the petitioner and the Learned Counsel for the opposite parties.
(2.) THROUGH this petition, the petitioner has challenged the retirement age at the age of 58 years. Submission on behalf of petitioner is that he is liable to be allowed to continue up to the age of 60 years in pursuance to the provisions made by the opposite parties in regard to the age of retirement of employees of Non Conventional Energy Agency ( hereinafter referred to as ' NEDA'). It is submitted that Rule 11(2) of Non Conventional Energy Department Agency Service Rules ,1989 provides that the 'age of superannuation will be as applicable to the State Government servants". This said rule has not been amended.
(3.) THE controversy in regard to the retirement age of the employees of NEDA has been decided by this Court in the Special Appeal No. 928 of 2006 Director, Neda and Ors. v. Smt. Urmila Pandey by means of judgment and order dated 12.3.2007. The case of the petitioner is identical to the case of respondent of the aforesaid special appeal and can not be distinguished by the opposite parties in any manner.;