Ashwani Kumar Mishra, J. - (1.) Petitioner was employed in the respondent U.P. Bhumi Sudhar Nigam, a government undertaking. The Corporation is registered under Section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956. For regulating the service conditions of the employees of the Corporation, U.P. Bhumi Sudhar Nigam General Service Rules have already been framed. Rules 26 and 68(1), which is relevant for our purposes, reads as under:- "Rule 26: An employee shall ordinarily retire at the age of 58 years unless the Board with the prior approval of the State Government extends the period of employment which, in no case, shall be beyond the age of 60 years. Rule 68(1): Power to remove difficulties If any difficulty in giving effect to the provision of these rules, the Board may, by a general or special order, do anything not inconsistent with the provision of Financial Hand Book volume II part II to IV of the Government of Uttar Pradesh which appears to it to be necessary or expedient for the purpose of removing the difficulty."
(2.) Petitioner contends that a proposal was forwarded for grant of approval by the State with regard to extension in the age of superannuation of employees of Corporation from 58 years to 60 years in the year 2012. State Government, according to petitioner, kept the matter pending with it without any rhyme or reason and ultimately accorded approval to it only on 30th March, 2015. The petitioner during the pendency of such proposal, however, superannuated on 31st May, 2014. Aggrieved by such action of respondents in proposing to retire him during the pendency of the proposal before the State Government, petitioner felt aggrieved and has, therefore, challenged the retirement notice issued to him on 7th March, 2014 in the writ petition. Initially a prayer was made to command respondents to notify enhancement of age from 58 years to 60 years. It is relevant to notice that the writ petition was filed immediately when the petitioner retired in May, 2014.
(3.) During the pendency of the writ petition, State Government actually approved the proposal for extension in the age of superannuation, and accordingly, the rules were amended to increase the age of superannuation from 58 years to 60 years. Petitioner, accordingly, amended the petition and prayed for a direction upon the respondents to modify the order enhancing the age of superannuation and thereby award benefit thereof to employees, who have retired during the pendency of proposal. Petitioner, therefore, seeks issuance of a writ of mandamus upon respondents to pay difference of salary and pension alongwith 12% interest treating the age of superannuation to be 60 years as on 31st May, 2014.;