The facts necessary for disposing of this appeal may be shortly stated, The appellant entered the service of the B.B. C.I. Railway on 30 11 1929 as a probationary Assistant Booking Clerk.
On 5 12 62 the age of retirement of all Railway servants, without any distinction, was raised to 58.
On 26 4 1963 the Railway Board issued a circular on the question of application of age of retirement under Rule 2046 of the Railway Establishment Code.
The circular of the Rail way Board dated 26 4 1963 picked out one section of the Railway employees which were governed by Rule 2046 of the Railway Establishment Code, as amended on 5 12 1962 and subjected them to hostile treatment.
On the basis of this circular the appellant was asked to retire on attaining the age of 55 as mentioned earlier.
The facts of the case in the decision of this Court, earlier referred to, are exactly the same.
The age of retirement under the Company was 55 years as indeed it was for Government servants also.
There also the Railway servant companycerned had originally entered the service with the Madras and Southern Mahratta Rail way Company.
Alagiriswami, J. This appeal by Certificate against the judgment of the High Court of Gujarat dismissing the plaintiffs writ petition questioning the order of the Divisional Superintendent of Western Railway directing him to retire on his attaining the age of 55 companyld be disposed of on the basis of the judgment of this Court in Railway Board v. A. Pitchumani .
This age of retirement was made a specific clause of the agreement.
At that time the appellant executed a service agreement which, among other things, pre served for him the leave privileges he was entitled to while serving under the Company.
On 1 1 1942 this Railway was taken over by the Central Government.
