D. S. Sinha, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri H. R. Misra, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Sub Divisional Officer, Jalaun at Orai, District Jalaun and Sri Bhagwati Prasad Srivastava iearned counsel representing Sri Brij Kishore Srivastava, the petitioner.
(2.) INVOKING the powers under Rule 56 of the U. P. Fundamental Rules, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Jalaun at Orai, District Jalaun, passed an order dated 28th May, 1986 whereby the petitioner, who was a Lekhpal at Tehsil Jalaun, was required to retire w. e. f. 31st May, 1986. The aforesaid order dated 28th May, 1986 requiring him to retire compulsorily from service was challenged by the petitioner through instant writ petition which was allowed by this Court by means of its judgment and order dated 26th September, 1988, and the order dated 28th May 1986, retiring the petitioner compulsorily, was quashed. The principal submission, which was advanced on behalf of the petitioner and accepted by the Court, was that the provisions of Rule 56 of the U. P. Fundamental Rules were not applicable in the case of the petitioner who belonged to the cadre of Lekhpal's service.
(3.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, he was governed by the provisions contained in the Lekhpai's Service Rules, 1958, hereinafter called the Rules. Under the Rules a Lekhpal could be retired compulsorily only if he had attained the age of 55 years while the petitioner had, on the date with effect from which he was required to retire, attained the age of about 53 years only. Although, in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Sub-Divisional Officer, it was asserted that the petitioner could be retired on attaining the age of 50 years according to the latest Rules but at the time of hearing those Rules could not be produced by the learned counsel representing the Sub-Divisional Officer. The court, therefore, proceeded on the basis of the unamended first proviso to Rule 31 of the Rules.;