SANJAY MISRA, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri M.R. Gupta learned counsel for the petitioner. List has been revised none appears on behalf of respondent No. 2 and 3. Learned Standing counsel is present on behalf of respondent No. 1. Counter affidavit filed by respondent No. 2 and 3 is available on record. Rejoinder has been filed.
(2.) THE petitioners who are 15 in number have filed this writ petition challenging the illegality of the impugned orders (Annexure 1 to 15) dated 16/17.8.1995 passed by the respondent No. 2 Executive Engineer, Municipal Board, Ghazipur whereby the petitioners have been retired after attaining the age of 50 years and before 60 years by exercising his power under Fundamental Rule 56(C) of Financial Handbook part II to IV. Learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the impugned orders mainly on the ground that the provisions of Fundamental Rules are applicable to Government servants and would not apply to Class IV employees of the Municipal Boards inasmuch as Regulations regarding the service conditions of Class IV employees of Municipal Board's have already been framed under the U.P. Municipalities Act 1916 wherein the age of retirement is provided as 60 years and therefore the impugned order is illegal and liable to be set aside.
(3.) IN the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents it has been stated that the Fundamental Rules are applicable to the petitioners and other employees of Nagarpalika and by retiring the petitioners after the age of 50 years and below the age of 60 years it cannot be said to be illegal. However, in reply to the averments made in paragraph 5 and 6 to the writ petition wherein the Regulations framed under the Municipalities Act have been referred to it has not been replied effectively inasmuch as it has been stated that paragraph 5 of the writ petition needs no reply and paragraph 6 and 7 of the writ petition are incorrect and denied and that the Fundamental Rules are applicable in the case of the petitioners also. Apart of the aforesaid defence no other ground has been taken to justify the passing of the impugned orders.;