WP(C) 1029/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. A.R. Sikdar, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. U. Baruah, learned Standing Counsel, ASTC. The petitioner who has retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 28.2.2011 at the age of 59 years has filed this writ petition praying for a direction to the Respondent/Corporation to allow him to continue i n service upto the age of 60 years in tune with the retirement age of the state govt. employees. His alternative submission is that the petitioner may be grante d extension of service as has been done in case of some other employees. Ms. U. Baruah, learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, submits that the ASTC has n ot extended the retirement age of its employees upto 60 years and presently the retirement age is 59 years. She further submits that the petitioner cannot claim as a matter of right for extension of his service upto 59 years. She has also p laced reliance on the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 688/2008 in whic h similar prayed was rejected. If the retirement age of the petitioner in the Corporation is 59 years n o mandamus can be issued towards continuation of the service of the petitioner beyond the said retirement age of 59 years. As to whether the petitioner should be reemployed or any extension of his service should be granted is the matter e xclusively within the domain and jurisdiction of the Corporation on which basis the writ court issued direction to grant reemployment or extension of service. If the petitioner is entitled to any such extension and/or reemployment, the Cor poration may consider the same on need basis. The petitioner may make representa tion to the ASTC authority in this regard.