Arun Tandon, J. - (1.) THE controversy with regard to the age of retirement of employees working in Jal Nigam subsequent to the enforcement of Uttar Pradesh Water Supply and Sewerage Act, 1975 is engaging the attention of this Court in large number of writ petitions.
(2.) THE petitioner under the impugned order has been informed that he shall retire on attaining the age of 58 years i. e. on 31.07.2010. According to the petitioner he is to retire at the age of 60 years. Reference is made to various interim orders passed by this Court permitting such continuance of employees till they attain the age of 60 years.
(3.) ON behalf of the respondent an order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 1424 (SB) of 2009; Mahesh Chandra Gupta v. State of U.P. and Ors. dated 04.02.2010 has been produced before this Court. The Division Bench has recorded following reasons for refusing to grant the interim order: In the present case, the petitioner was appointed in Jal Nigam on 25.5.1983 after the Jal Nigam was set up on 18.6.1975 and that prima facie his services will be regulated by the regulations made by the U.P. Jal Nigam Employees Retirement on Superannuation Regulations, 2005. The retirement age of all those employees, who were appointed in Jal Nigam is provided in the Regulations of 2005, to be 58 years. The petitioner, therefore, cannot prima facie at this stage be given the benefit of the judgments in Radhey Shyam's case decided by the Supreme Court or in Ram Singh's case decided by learned Single Judge. In Radhey Shyam's case the Jal Nigam did not place on record the Regulations of 2005 and that the judgment in Ram Singh's case in which regulations were found to be violative of Article and of the Constitution of India has been stayed in special appeal. Further we do not find any justification to grant interim order as the petitioner can be compensated in terms of pay and allowance, if the judgment in Ram Singh's case is upheld or this writ petition is allowed. The stay application is rejected.;