IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3055 of 2010 1. DR.VISHWESH CHAUDHARY S/O LATE JAGDISH CHAUDHARY ASSISTANT DIRECTOR ,BIHAR RAJAY SANSKRIT ACADEMY ,PATNA ,PRESENTLY WORKING AS DIRECTOR-IN-CHARGE -CUM- SECRETARY, BIHAR RAJAY SANSKRIT ACADEMY, PATNA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DIRECTOR, HIGHER EDUCATION, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. BIHAR STATE SANSKRIT ACADEMY THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR- CUM-SECRETARY, 31, HANUMAN NAGAR, PUNAICHAK, PATNA ----------- 03. 06.09.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent academy. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent Academy. Upon perusal of the order of the Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No. 146 of 2007, in context of the Bhojpuri Academy, registered under the Societies Registration Act, this Court is satisfied that the respondent academy is also amenable to the writ jurisdiction. The crux of the controversy in this case is the age of retirement of the employees of the respondent Academy. Whether it shall be 55 years, 60 years or 62 years. The age of retirement is primarily a policy matter to be determined by the employer himself in accordance 2 with law. The counter affidavit encloses the bye-laws of the respondent Academy. The bye-laws do not contain any stipulation of the age of retirement. The Bye-law 5, read with Sub-Clauses (d) (e) and (f) provide for such major policies decision (including that of the age of retirement) to be taken by the Managing Committee as distinct from the general body created by Rule 6 and its duties defined in Rule-7. The counter affidavit does not make any statement that any decision with regard to the age of retirement of its employee has been taken by the Managing Committee. This Court is not satisfied that a counter affidavit by a member of the Managing Committee without a specific resolution of the Managing Committee, shall tantamount to the decision of the Managing Committee, to even accept the age of retirement of employees as 60 years as conceded in the counter affidavit. It may also be noticed that the petitioner claimed the age of retirement 62 years in context of a similar decision of the Bihar Hindi Granth Academy, noticed in C.W.J.C. No. 14100 of 2003. But, the distinction therein lies to be noticed at page-6 of the order of this Court that the bye-laws itself provided for the age of retirement as 62 years. That naturally must 3 have been in pursuance of a decision taken in accordance with law. This Court, therefore, finds it difficult to arrive at any positive finding of the age of retirement as 60 or 62 of those employed in the respondent Academy. These are policy matters to be decided by the Managing Committee in accordance with the bye-laws. Let such decision by the Managing Committee be taken preferably within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The application stands disposed. P.K. (Navin Sinha, J.)