[N THE HIGH COUF}T 0F SIKKIM OF]DEF] SHEET Writ aetitlot| {C). Shri Y, a, Versus union of India a Anr. .... No. 39 of 2oo7 Petitioner / Appellant F]espondent Order with Signature Office Note as to action (if any) taken on Order 1. 0-12-2007 Present: Mr. A.K. Upadhyaya, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ashim Chhetri, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ka]ma Thinlay, Central Govt. Standing Counsel. This is a wit petition at the instance of a single army officer whose retirement age is at present according to Rules fixed at 52. He is due to retire very soon i.e. with the expiry of December, 2007. The writ petition is being moved at the last moment and allegations are made about discrimination and that the retirement age should be compulsorily raised by the writ Court to 54. Naturally along with it the stay order is also prayed for. Mr. Upadhyaya submitted that there should be stay of retirement until the disposal of the writ, or the retirement should be subject to the Serial Date Order with Signature Office Note as to No. of of action (if any) Order Order taken on Order +, result of the wit. It is also submitted that theMinistryisactivelyconsideringtheraisingofthe age of the gr.oup to which the writ petitioner belongs. Very clearly the writ Court should not. interfere in these service matters which are pure policy decisions. Above all, it would be most unwise to passorders affecting a whole class, and that too within the army, only at the instance of a single officer who is due to retire practically the next day. The wit petition is dismissed without any order as to costs. Since affidavits are not invited, the allegations cannot be taken to be admitted to any extent. (A.N. Ra-y, CJ)(A.P.Subba,J)