Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sarabjeet Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 31 October, 2012
Author: A.K. Sikri
Bench: A.K. Sikri, Rakesh Kumar Jain
CWP No. 21563 of 2012 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 21563 of 2012
Date of Decision : 31.10.2012.
Sarabjeet Singh and others
...Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI, CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN
Present: Mr. K.S. Dadwal, Advocate,
for the petitioners.
****
A.K. SIKRI, C.J.
The petitioners have been working in the various departments of Government of Punjab. Some of the petitioners are working in autonomous bodies like PSEB, Patiala, Cooperative Bank as well as Mandi Board etc. The petitioners No. 1 to 18 and 22 to 28 were retired w.e.f. 30.09.2012 whereas petitioners No. 19 to 21 were retired on 31.08.2012.
In the year 2010, age of retirement of all such employees in the service of Government of Punjab was 58 years. The State Government took decision to enhance the age of retirement for which notification dated 27.01.2010 was issued, whereby, the services beyond 58 years was decided to be extended for one year. This notification was, however, struck down by this Court vide order dated 29.03.2010 passed in CWP No. 2247 of 2010, holding it to be CWP No. 21563 of 2012 -2- contrary to Rule 3.26 of the Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume 1 Part 1 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules).
To overcome the aforesaid irregularity, the government amended Rule 3.26 itself and amended notification dated 08.10.2012 was issued. The effect of the said notification amending this Rule is to increase the one year service to the service period of Groups A, B, C and D employees of the Punjab Government on certain conditions stipulated therein. This notification also specifies the cut-off date of 31.10.2012 for giving the benefit of one year enhanced service. The effect thereof is that those who are going to superannuate on 31.10.2012 or thereafter are given the benefit.
The petitioners retired in August, 2012 and September, 2012. Thus, when the notification was issued on 08.10.2012, they had already retired. However, they want the benefit of that notification and for this reason they have filed the present petition, questioning the validity of cut-off date of 31.10.2012. Another benefit they want that retrospective effect be given to the said notification. This plea is based on the premise that the Council of Ministers had taken a decision in the meeting held on 28.08.2012, accepting the proposal with regard to the amendment of the Rules. Therefore, the decision should have been made applicable w.e.f. 28.08.2012.
This is hardly a valid plea for questioning the validity of the cut-off date. The notification has been issued on 08.10.2012. Since an employee who attains the age of superannuation retires on CWP No. 21563 of 2012 -3- the last date of that month and the persons who are to retire after 08.10.2012 i.e. on 31.10.2012 or thereafter are given the benefit, fixing of this cut-off date is the prerogative of the employer. Unless it is shown that the date is fixed on irrational and arbitrary criteria and is discriminatory, the Courts are not to interfere with the same. Merely because the Council of Ministers had approved the amendment on 28.08.2012, the petitioners cannot claim any right for fixing of that date as the cut-off date.
We, thus, do not find any merit in this appeal which is accordingly dismissed.
(A.K. SIKRI) CHIEF JUSTICE (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) JUDGE 31.10.2012 Amodh