The Special Appeal was filed stating that the interim order was companytrary to the view taken by a Division Bench in Harwindra Kumar v. Chief Engineer Karmik, UP Jal, Nigam, Lakhnow and Ors.
In support of the appeal learned companynsel for the appellant submitted that the interim order was companytrary to the view expressed by the Division Bench which was binding on a subsequent Division Bench and in any event on all learned Single Judges.
2002 2 UPLBEC 1511.
18579 of 2005 Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Leave granted.
Arising out of SLP Civil No.
Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court questioning companyrectness of the order passed by a Division Bench in the Special Appeal filed by the appellant against an interim order passed by a learned Single Judge permitting the respondent No.1 to companytinue in service of the appellant No.1 till attaining the age of 60 years.
The case of the appellant before both learned Single Judge and the Division Bench was that the standard age of retirement of its employees is 58 years and the writ petitioner i.e. respondent No.1 was numberexception.
The Division Bench dismissed the appeal.
