IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2009 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1930 OP.No. 2356 of 2000(E) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. P. NANU, CHIEF SECURITY OFFICER, THALASSERY GENERAL HOSPITAL, RESIDING AT “GEETHA”, P.O. MAMBRAM, DIST. KANNUR. 2. K. KARUNAN, SECURITY GUARD, THLASSERY GENERAL HOSPITAL, RESIDING AT KUNNUMMAL HOUSE, P.O. PALAYAD, DIST. KANNUR. 3. K. KRISHNAN, SECURITY GUARD, THALASSERY GENERL HOSPITAL, RESIDING AT KOZHUR, ERUVATTY, P.O. ERUVATTY, DIST. KANNUR. 4. M.BALAKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, SECURITY GUARD, THALASSERY GENERAL HOSPITAL, RESIDING AT BALAKRISHNALAYAM, P.O.VADAKKUMBAD, DIST. KANNUR. 5. S. FERNANDEZ, SECURITY GUARD, THALASSERY GENERAL HOSPITAL, RESIDING AT KPPAKADAVU, P.O.AZHIKKAL, DIST. KANNUR. 6. C. BASTIN, SECURITY GUARD, THLASSERY GENERAL HOSPITAL, RESIDING AT KARIAKUNNEL HOUSE, P.O.PUNNOL, THALASSERY, DIST. KANNUR. 7. P.V.KUNHIRAMAN, SECURITY GUARD, THALASSERY GENERAL HOSPITAL, RESIDING AT “PRASEENA NILAYAM”, POYANAD, P.O.MAMBRAM, VIA. PINARAYI, DIST. KANNUR. BY ADV. MR.E.V.NAYANAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE (B) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. OP.No. 2356 of 2000(E) 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR & CHAIRMAN OF HOSPITAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, THALASSERY GENERAL HOSPITAL, KANNUR 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT, GENERAL HOSPITAL, THALASSERY. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SMITHA SUKUMARAN FOR R1& R2 ADV. MR.T.A.RAMADASAN FOR R3 THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP.No. 2356 of 2000(E) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G1-4130/91 DATED 29/02/92 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE ORDER G1-3702/91 DATED 23/11/91 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE ORDR G1-2181/92 DATED 30/05/1992 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE G.O.(P)552/97/FIN DATED 23/05/1997. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE G.O.(P)1187/99/FIN. DATED 29/03/1999. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G2/(HDC)/4779/97 DATED 14/01/2000 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14/03/2000 IN CMP. NO.459/2000 IN O.P. NO.284/2000 OF HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE AWARD DATED 05/03/1997 OF THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL KOZHIKODE IN I.D.14/96. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS & ANNEXURES: EXT.R3(a): COPY OF THE GOVT. ORDER G.O.(MS)NO.141/97/H & FWD DATED 25/04/1997. EXT.R3(b): COPY OF THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT NO.38247/M3/98 H& RWD DATED 16/02/1999. ANNEXURE I: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21/01/2000 IN CMP. NO.3796/2000 IN O.P.2356/2000 WITH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 22/01/2000 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE II: COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 22/01/2000 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT, WITH ENDORSEMENT OF 3RD RESPONDENT. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Rs/ S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= O.P. No. 2356 of 2000 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 3rd March, 2009. J U D G M E N T Petitioners are security guards employed by the 2nd respondent Hospital Development Committee of Thalasserry General Hospital. They are aggrieved by fixation of retirement age of 55 years. All of them are ex-servicemen. According to them, the respondents cannot arbitrarily fix a retirement age since the same was not a service condition at the time when the petitioners joining service. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed wherein it has been stated that the Hospital Development Society not being a statutory body, they are not amenable to the writ jurisdiction of this Court . 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 4. Challenging the same orders as in this original petition, some other petitioners had filed O.P.No. 11054/1994 in which a learned Judge of this Court had passed the following judgment: “This Original Petition had been filed in effect challenging the decision of the Hospital Development Committee. It is not a statutory body and a writ may not be maintainable against such Committee. Te counter affidavit shows that the services of the petitioners had been terminated for valid reasons and two of them are aged 75 years now. In view of the above reasons, I do not think it necessary to grant any reliefs to the petitioners. Consequently, the Original Petition is dismissed.” In this case, the dates of birth of the petitioners are as follows: “ Name of security personnel Date of birth 1. Sri. P. NANU 28.3.1942 2. K. KARUNAN 31.12.1937 3. K. KRISHNAN 3.6.1940 O.P.. No. 2356/2000 -: 2 :- 4. M. BALAKRISHNAN NAMBIAR 15.3.1942 5. S. FERNANDEZ 17.1.1941 6. P.V. KUNHIRAMAN 12.5.1944 7. C. BASTIN 5.6.1939.” Going by their dates of birth, they are near to the age of 70 years. The very job of security guards requires able bodied personnel. That being so, now that the petitioners are almost 70 years of age, I do not think that they can claim to continue in service and effectively discharge their duties. Therefore, I do not think that the petitioners can validly press their claim in tis original petition. Accordingly, the original petition is dismissed. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/