The petitioner is aggrieved by the notice dated 02.06.2014, Annexure-1 to the writ petition whereby he has been informed that he will retire on 31.07.2014 on attaining the age of superannuation of 58 years.
The contention of the petitioner is that on 01.08.2013 a decision has been taken by the State Government that the age of superannuation in the District Rural Development Agency (DRDA) has been enhanced from 58 years to 60 years. This controversy has already been settled by several Division Benches of this Court being Special Appeal No.1265 of 2013, Shyam Narain Chauhan Vs. State of U.P. and Others and Special Appeal No.73 of 2014, Yogendra Prakash Mishra Vs. State of U.P. and Others. In Yogendra Narain Mishra (supra) case the Division Bench has relied upon the decision of Shyam Narain Chauhan (supra) and has directed that the decision whether the age of retirement should be enhanced from 58 years to 60 years is a policy decision and has referred the matter back to the State Government to take a decision in this regard.
Similar direction has been given by me in Service Single No.3244 of 2014, Anil Kumar Srivastava Vs. State of U.P. and Others. It is therefore directed that without interfering with the notice of retirement dated 02.06.2014 this writ petition is disposed of with the observation that in case ultimately, the proposal of the DRDA is approved by the State Government and the age of superannuation of its employees is enhanced to 60 years, the aforesaid policy decision will also govern the case of the petitioner, provided he is found to be covered by the said decision.
Since it is a matter relating to a policy decision to be taken by the State Government, the respondent no.1, Principal Secretary, Government of U.P. Department of Rural Development, Civil Secretariat, Lucknow is directed to take a decision in this regard expeditiously preferably within a period of four months from the date of a receipt of certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 28.7.2014 N Tiwari