Rakesh Tiwari, J. - (1.) The question for determination in these petitions is whether the age of retirement of the employees of Local Self Government (Engineering Department) whose services stood transferred to the U.P. Jal Nigam on the appointed date by virtue of Section 3 of the U.P. Water Supply and Sewerage Act would be 58 years or 60 years. Backgrounds of the case
(2.) Before entering into the controversy of the case, it may be mentioned here that the matter of enhancement of age of superannuation of the employees of Nigam had come up before a Division Bench of this Court in Civil Misc Writ No. 43770 of 2005 -Harwinder Kumar and Ors. v. Chief Engineer, Karmik and Ors. claiming that they have legal right to continue in service till they attain the age of 60 years as State Government has enhanced the age of superannuation of its employees from 58 to 60 years. The aforementioned writ petition was dismissed holding that the age of superannuation of employees of Nigam is 58 years. Aggrieved by the judgment of the Division Bench in the aforesaid writ petition, Special Appeal No. 7840 of 2002 Harwinder Kumar and Ors. v. Chief Engineer, Karmik and Ors. was filed, which was allowed by Hon'ble Supreme Court holding that since the petitioners were governed by U.P. Jal Nigam Engineering Public Health Branch Service Regulations, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Regulations of 1978') having been framed in exercise of power under Section 97 of the Act in respect of engineer cadres, Regulation 31 thereof is applicable to them, The operative portion of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Hrwinder Kumar's case reported in AIR 2006 SC 365 , 2006 (1) AWC 524 (SC), JT 2005 (10) SC 32 , (2006)I LLJ 452 SC , 2005 (9)SCALE 452 , (2005)13 SCC300 , 2006 (2) SLJ 19 (SC) is as under: For the foregoing reasons, the appeals as well as writ petitions are allowed, orders passed by the High Court dismissing the writ petitions as well as those by the Nigam directing that the appellants of the civil appeals and petitioners of the writ petitions would superannuate upon completion of the age of 58 years are set aside and it is directed that in case the employees have been allowed to continue up to the age of 60 years by virtue of some interim order, no recovery shall be made from them but in case, however, they have not been allowed to continue after completing the age of 58 years by virtue of erroneous decision taken by the Nigam for no fault of theirs, for the remaining period up to the age of 60 years which must be paid to them within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of the order by the Nigam. There shall be no order as to costs.
(3.) During the pendency of the Civil Appeal, a large number of employees of Nigam were served with notice of retirement at the age of 58 years and were retired accordingly. Those employees who had been retired at the age of 58 years in the meantime approached filed these writ petitions claiming that they were entitled to retire from service after attaining the age of 60 years, in view of order dated 18.11.2005 in Civil Appeal No. 7840 of 2002- Harwinder Kumar's case (supra) passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court.;