IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6752 of 2011 SHYAM NANDAN SINGH, son of late Shubh Dayal Singh, resident of Mohalla-Dandi Bagh, Ward No.45, P.S. Civil Lines, Town and District- Gaya….. Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Gaya Municipal Corporation, Gaya through its Municipal Commissioner. 3. The Municipal Commissioner, Gaya Municipal Corporation, Gaya…. ……………..Respondents. ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. Abhay Shankar Singh, Advocate For the State: Mr.Rajeev Kumar Sinha, A.C. to AAG-15 For the Gaya Municipal Corpn.: Mr. Ravindra Kumar Priyadarshi,Advocate ------------- 2. 20.4.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsels for the Gaya Municipal Corporation as also for the State. The petitioner seeks a direction on the respondent Gaya Municipal Corporation not to retire the petitioner on 30.4.2011 and to allow him to continue in the service of Gaya Municipal Corporation up to enhanced age of superannuation,i.e.60 years, irrespective of his completion of 40 years in service on 14.4.2011. The facts, as per the writ petition, are that the petitioner joined the service of Gaya Municipal Corporation on 15.4.1971, whereas his date of birth is 13.11.1953. Thus the petitioner completed 40 years of service on 14.4.2011 and he will attain the enhanced age of superannuation, - 2 - i.e., 60 years, on 13.11.2013. Accordingly, he claims that after the enhancement of age of retirement, he should be allowed to retire on 30.11.2013. The issue raised by the petitioner is no longer res integra and the same has been decided by a Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A.No.645/2006 filed by the Gaya Municipal Corporation, by order dated 12.4.2007 which has been reported in 2007(4) PLJR 317. Relying upon the same and another case cited by learned counsel for the Gaya Municipal Corporation, I have already dismissed another writ petition being C.W.J.C.No.5047/2011: Shiv Bachan Sharma vs. The State of Bihar and others by order dated 23.3.2011. In the above circumstances, there is no merit in this writ petition also and it is, accordingly, dismissed. VPS ( Ramesh Kumar Datta, J. )