M.KATJU, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 28.11.2001 (Annexure 16, 17 and 18 to he writ petition) by which the petitioners have been retired from the service of the British India Corporation at the age of 58 years and the orders of the same date copies of which are Annexure 11 and 12 to the writ petition.
(2.) WE have heard learned Counsel for the parties. The petitioners 1 and 2 were initially appointed in temporary capacity for two months in March, 1969 in the service of Cawnpore Woolen Mills Branch of British India Corporation vide Annexure-1 to the writ petition. The petitioner No. 3 was appointed on probation for six months w.e.f. 25.11.1970 under the same Corporation vide Annexure-2 to the writ petition. It is alleged in Paragraph 7 of the writ petition that the age of retirement of the petitioners is 60 years according to the rules and regulations of the Company. In Paragraphs 8 to 11 of the writ petition the petitioners have referred to orders of other employees of the Company who were retired at the age of 60 years vide Annexures-3 to 6 to the writ petition. The petitioners have also referred to other documents to show that the retirement age of the employees of the Company is 60 years except of those appointed on 31.4.1954 vide Annexure 14 and 15 to the writ petition. By the impugned order it is stated that the employees of the Company shall be retired at the age of 58 years and not 60 years purporting to act in respect of some directive referring to the roll back to the age of retirement vide Annexure 11 and 12 to the writ petition.
(3.) IN Paragraph 17 of the writ petition it is stated that vide order dated 14.1.2002 which annexes a decision of the Government of India. Ministry of Textiles dated 10.1.2001 the Scheme of roll back of the age of retirement from 60 years to 58 years would be applicable only to those whose age of retirement earlier was enhanced from 58 years to 60 years vide Annexure 13 to the writ petition. The petitioner association made representations of the respondents stating that they should be retired at the age of 60 years vide Annexure 14 and 15 to the writ petition. However, the impugned orders have been passed stating that the petitioners have been retired at the age of 58 years.;