ANIL KUMAR, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Bhupal Singh Rathore, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri A.N. Trivedi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel and Sri Rajiv Singh Chauhan on behalf of respondents and perused the record.
(2.) BY means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned retirement notice dated 13.03.2013 (Annexure No. 1) passed by District Basic Education Officer, Sitapur by which the petitioner is sought to be retired after attaining the age of superannuation (62 years) on 30.06.2013. Sri B.S. Rathore, learned counsel for petitioner while assailing the impugned order submits that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher in Primary Pathshala Naseerpur Kodar, Rewsa, Sitapur on 18.07.1985. Presently, he is working as Headmaster, Senior Basic School, Ramipur, Gondwa, Sitapur.
(3.) HE further submits that the date of birth of the petitioner is 01.07.1951, so keeping in view the said fat as per the provisions as provided under Rule 29 of the U.P. Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) which is amended by Uttar Pradesh Basic Shiksha (Teachers) Service Rules 15 Amendment Rules, 2012 dated 31.08.2012, the action on the part of O.P. No. 3 to issue the impugned notice of retirement dated 13.03.2013 (Annexure No. 1) that the petitioner is to retire on 30.06.2013 is arbitrary in nature and contrary to the said rule, as he is entitled to get the service benefit till the end of academic session i.e. to work and discharge his duties till 30.06.2014, hence the same is liable to be set aside. In support of his argument, he placed reliance in the case of Ram Lal Prasad Vs. State of U.P. and others, 1987 UPLBEC 566.;