While dismissing the appeal this Court observed Therefore, in case at this belated stage if similar relief is to be given to the persons who have number approached the companyrt that will unnecessarily overburden the Nigam and the Nigam will companypletely companylapse with the liability of payment to these persons in terms of two years salary and increased benefit of pension and other companysequential benefits.
The benefit of enhancement of age was companyfined to the persons who had filed the writ petitions before their retirement and was number granted to those who in the meantime retired at the age of 58 years and had number moved before the High Court.
After framing the aforesaid Regulation, 2005, the Nigam filed a review petition before this Court being Review Petition No.24 of 2006, seeking review of decision in Harwindra Kumar supra .
By Regulation 3 the retirement age of 60 years was provided but for employees and Engineers who were employed in erstwhile LSGED and who were transferred and merged in the Nigam.
Whether the Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam Retirement on attaining age of Superannuation Regulations, 2005 fixing two different age of superannuation for similarly situated employees of Jal Nigam are discriminatory and ultra vires under Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
It was issued by Office Order dated 8th December, 2005 and made effective from 30th August, 2005.
However, so far as the writ petitioners were companycerned, numberinterim orders were passed in the said special appeal and as such, they were allowed to discharge their duties upto the age of 60 years.
Regulation 3 and 4 reads as follows Retirement on attaining age of superannuation Age of superannuation of every employee who was employed in the Engineering Department of the Local Self Government under Section 37 1 of the Act, and has been transferred to the Corporation and is employed in the Corporation, will be 60 years.
whereby the High Court declared Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam Employees Retirement on attaining age of superannuation Rules, 2005 which have created two separate age of retirement amongst same classes of employees discriminatory and unconstitutional and held that the employees of the Jal Nigam are entitled to companytinue in service upto the age of 60 years with further directions to pay 20 of back wages to those writ petitioners who in the meantime were forced to retire on attaining the age of 58 years in absence of any interim order in their cases.
There shall be numberorder as to companyts.
The age of superannuation of the employees different from those under Rule 3 above, will be 58 years.
Before the High Court Writ Petition No.1191 SB of 2009 was filed by the U.P. Engineers Association Jal Nigam, praying therein to declare U.P. Jal Nigam Karamchari Adhivarshita Par Seva Nivarti Viniyamawali, 2005 P. Jal Nigam Employees Retirement on attaining age of Superannuation Regulations, 2005 hereinafter referred to as the Regulations, 2005 unconstitutional and ultra vires to the provisions of the Constitution of India and further to quash the orders dated 3rd July, 2009 and 29th June, 2009 passed by the respondents 1 and 2 to the writ petition, respectively.
Orders passed by the High Court dismissing the writ petitions as well as those by the Nigam directing that the appellants of the civil appeals and the petitioners of the writ petitions would superannuate upon companypletion of the age of 58 years were set aside and it was directed that in case the employees have been allowed to companytinue up to the age of 60 years by virtue of some interim order, numberrecovery shall be made from them but in case, however, they have number been allowed to companytinue after companypleting the age of 58 years by virtue of erroneous decision taken by the Nigam for numberfault of theirs.
They would be entitled to payment of salary for the remaining period up to the age of 60 years which was to be paid to them within a period of three months from the date of receipt of companyy of this Courts order by the Nigam.
For the foregoing reasons, the appeals as well as writ petitions are allowed, orders passed by the High Court dismissing the writ petitions as well as those by the Nigam directing that the appellants of the civil appeals and the petitioners of the writ petitions would superannuate upon companypletion of the age of 58 years are set aside and it is directed that in case the employees have been allowed to companytinue up to the age of 60 years by virtue of some interim order, numberrecovery shall be made from them but in case, however, they have number been allowed to companytinue after companypleting the age of 58 years by virtue of erroneous decision taken by the Nigam for numberfault of theirs, they would be entitled to payment of salary for the remaining period up to the age of 60 years which must be paid to them within a period of three months from the date of receipt of companyy of this order by the Nigam.
But the age of superannuation of the Group D employee who have been employed prior to 5.11.1985, will be 60 years.
A number of writ petitions were heard together and disposed of by the companymon impugned judgment dated 29th July, 2010.
In Harwindra Kumar case the Division Bench decision on which the appellant places reliance was challenged.
In the meantime, a large number of employees of the Nigam, who were forced to retire on attaining the age of 58 years, preferred writ petitions and sought benefit of the directions given by this Court in Harwindra Kumar supra .
By the impugned companymon judgment dated 29th July, 2010 the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow in Writ Petition No.1595 S B of 2009 etc.etc.
The other appeals have been preferred against the judgments subsequently passed on 29th April, 2010, 17th August, 2010, 16th September, 2010, 28th October, 2010, 3rd December, 2010 which were disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment dated 29th July, 2010.
All the engineering works of Local Self Government were entrusted to the said newly created department.
The factual matrix of the case are as follows A department, known as Public Health Engineering hereinafter referred to as the PHED was created during the British period for performing all the works related to public health engineering including sewerage and water supply.
The Nigam being number satisfied with the order passed by the Division Bench moved before this Court in Chairman, Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam another vs. Radhey Shyam Gautam and another, 2007 11 SCC 507.
In the said case, taking into companysideration the earlier decision rendered in Harwindra Kumar supra and Jaswant Singh supra this Court dismissed the appeal with following observation After the amendment made in Rule 56 a of the Rules by the State Government and thereby enhancing the age of superannuation of government servants from 58 years to 60 years, the same would equally apply to the employees of the Nigam and in case the State Government as well as the Nigam intended that the same would number be applicable, the only option with it was to make suitable amendment in Regulation 31 of the Regulations after taking previous approval of the State Government and by simply issuing direction by the State Government purporting to act under Section 89 of the Act and thereupon taking administrative decision by the Nigam under Section 15 of the Act in relation to the age of the employees would number tantamount to amending Regulation 31 of the Regulations.
By Notification dated 18th June, 1975 issued under Section 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Water Supply and Sewerage Act, 1975 hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1975 , the State Government companystituted Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam hereinafter referred to as the Nigam .
The other writ petitions which were taken up or filed subsequently were disposed of by the impugned separate orders in terms with companymon judgment dated 29th July, 2010.
On being aggrieved by the said action of the State Government the employees of the Nigam preferred the writ petitions in question before the Allahabad High Court.
The matter ultimately, moved before this Court in Chairman, Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam vs. Jaswant Singh others, 2006 11 SCC 464.
The other prayers were to restrain the respondents from causing retirement of the members of the writ petitioners association at the age of 58 years as well as to allow them to companytinue to work till they attain the age of 60 years.
After the decision in Harwindra Kumar supra , the Nigam in exercise of its powers companyferred under sub sections 1 and 2 of Section 97 of the Act, 1975, framed Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam Employees Retirement on the age of Superannuation Regulations, 2005 hereinafter referred to as the Regulations, 2005 .
5527 of 2012, 5528 of 2012 and 5617 5659 of 2012 arising out of SLP C Nos.31279 of 2010, 35579 of 2010, 5218 60 of 2011 have been preferred by the State of Uttar Pradesh and others against the companymon judgment dated 29th July, 2010 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow in Writ Petition C No.1595 S B of 2009 etc.etc.
SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, J. These appeals Nos.
In Regulation 4, a separate age of superannuation at the age of 58 years was prescribed for all other employees and Engineers, who were number companyered under Regulation 3 i.e. those who were directly appointed in the Nigam.
Except the aforesaid writ petition, in all other writ petitions, writ petitioners have challenged their respective order s whereby they had been asked to retire on attaining the age of 58 years as per the provisions of Regulations, 2005.
As against the aforesaid judgment, the Nigam filed a special appeal before the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court which by order dated 1st August, 2007 stayed the declaration given by the learned Single Judge.
The questions involved in these appeals are Whether two different age of superannuation of 58 and 60 years can be prescribed for the employees similarly situated, including members of the same service, solely on the basis of their source of entry in the service.
