Court No. - 2
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 9868 of 2018 Petitioner :- Vansh Narayan Chaubey Respondent :- The State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prashant Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ram Surat Ram (Maurya),J.
Heard Sri Prashant Kumar Tripathi for the petitioner and Standing Counsel for State of U.P.
This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 27.1.2018, passed by Chief Executive Officer, by which a notice of retirement has been given to the petitioner, w.e.f. 31.1.2018.
It is stated that the petitioner was appointed as Archak in Kashi Vishwanath Temple. Kashi Vishwanath Temple has been acquired by U.P. Shri Kashi Vishwanath Temple Act 1983. The power of ownership of temple, as well as power to manage the property and staff of the temple is vested in the Board of Trustees. Under Section 14 of U.P. Shri Kashi Vishwanath Temple Act 1983, the duties of Board of Trustees have been prescribed, which includes to do all things, as may be incidental and conducive to the efficient management of the affairs of the temple and its endowment and convenience of pilgrims and worshippers.
In exercise of the powers u/s 6, read with Section 14 of the aforesaid Act, the Board used to pass resolutions from time to time. By the 93rd Resolution dated 23.12.2017, age of retirement of the employees has been amended from 65 years to 60 years. There is no dispute that the petitioner has completed the age of 60 years. The only argument of counsel for the petitioner is that u/s 36 of the aforesaid Act, the petitioner is deemed to be a public servant and therefore, for removal of the petitioner from his office, in the absence of any Service Rules, opportunity of hearing was required to be given.
So far as 93rd Resolution dated 23.12.2017 is concerned, there is nothing on record to show that it has any prospective or retrospective application. Thus, removal of the petitioner before the age of 65 years, as earlier the age of retirement was 65 years, was illegal.
I have considered the arguments of counsel for the petitioner and examined the record. So far as Section 36 of U.P. Shri Kashi Vishwanath Temple Act 1983 is concerned, status of public servant has been given only for the purpose of Section 21 of Indian Penal Code and not for any other purpose. Otherwise, the petitioner will remain an employee of Kashi Vishwanath Temple. The Board is a supreme body of Kashi Vishwanath Temple and it has jurisdiction to frame the regulations relating to employees of the temple. In exercise of power u/s 6, read with Section 18 of the aforesaid Act, 93rd Resolution dated 23.12.2017 has been passed. Even if it has not been mentioned that it has prospective or retrospective application, but the Rules regulating the services stands amended by this resolution and under this resolution, age of retirement is 60 years. Therefore, as the petitioner has completed 60 years of age, he has rightly been asked to retire from 31.1.2018. The impugned order does not suffer from any illegality.
The writ petition has no merit and is dismissed.
Order Date :- 27.3.2018 Jaideep/-