- (1.) The petitioner is seeking mandamus directing the respondents to allow him to continue is service upto the age of 60 years.
(2.) The facts of the case in brief are that the petitioner was appointed on temporary basis as untrained teacher on 15.6.1954 vide D.P.I. Pepsu order No. E/29168-G/64 dated 15.6.1954 (copy Annexure P-1) at fixed salary of Rs. 50/- per month. He was allowed study leave by his erstwhile employer. The petitioner on the merger of Pepsu into Punjab 1.11.1965 continued to occupy the same position as he was holding prior to it. By an order dated 16.5.1961 the petitioner was appointed as a trained Graduate Master since he had acquired qualifications for the same. He was asked to fill up the pension papers by the respondents as his date of superannuation was to reach on 31.10.1989 at the age of 58 years.
(3.) The case of the petitioner is that after merger of Pepsu into Punjab his conditions of service continued to be the same as were in the State of Pepsu. According to him his service conditions are governed by Pepsu Civil Service Regulations and he belongs to inferior service as in the erstwhile State of Pepsu the employees were categorized into two categories i.e. 'inferior' and 'superior'. The age of superannuation in the case of employees belonging to inferior category is 60 years. As such, he cannot be made to retire on attaining the age of 58 years. The learned counsel for the petitioner has brought to my notice the various provisions of Pepsu Service Regulations . On the other hand, Mr. G.S. Bal, Advocate, appearing for the respondents opposed the claim of the petitioner vehemently and urged that the petitioner does not belong to inferior service. In order to fortify his argument, the learned counsel too has relied upon certain provisions of Pepsu Service Regulations .;