VIJAI BAHADUR RAI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard Sri Yogesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Standing counsel for respondent No. 1 as well as Sri M.M.D. Agarwal for respondents No. 2 and 3.

(2.) Counter affidavit on behalf of respondents may be filed within one month. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within another three weeks.

(3.) The facts of the case in brief are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Junior Engineer on 10.8.1972 in the Local Self Government, Engineering Department (L.S.G.E.D.) of Government of Uttar Pradesh. While he was serving as Junior Engineer in the aforesaid department, U.P. Jal Nigam was established and constituted under Sections 3 and 4 of U.P. Water Supply and Sewerage Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as Act). Thereupon the services of employees of the Local Self Government, Engineering Department of the State Government were transferred in the U.P. Jal Nigam (hereinafter referred to as Nigam) under Section 37 of the Act from appointed date i.e. 18.6.1975. Consequently the petitioner's services were also transferred in the Nigam, since then he became employee of Nigam and is continuing as such. The services of employees of erstwhile L.S.G.E.D. of State Government were transferred in the Nigam with the condition that the employees so transferred shall hold his office or service therein by the same tenure at the same remuneration and upon same other terms and conditions and with same rights and privilege as to pension, gratuity and other matters as he would have held the same on the appointed date if this Act has not come into force and shall continue until his employment in the Nigam is terminated or until his other terms and conditions of the service are revised or altered by the Nigam under or in pursuance of any law or in accordance with any provision which for time being governs . In due course of time the petitioner was promoted on the post of Assistant Engineer. While working as Assistant Engineer in Nigam an office order was issued on 17.3.2005 communicating to the petitioner that on 31.6.2005 he would attain the age of superannuation 58 years and would be retired from service afternoon on that date. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid office order the petitioner has filed above noted writ petition inter alia on the grounds mentioned in the writ petition.