IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6821 of 2009 UDAY KUMAR SON OF LATE BHAGIRATH SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND P.O. VISHUNPUR, VIA AND P.S. VAJIRGANJ, DISTRICT GAYA. Versus 1.BIHAR STATE CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, KHAWAJA IMALI, ANISABAD, PATNA. 2. MANAGING DIRECTOR, BIHAR STATE CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, KHAWAJA IMALI, ANISABAD, PATNA. 3. MANAGING DIRECTOR, BIHAR STATE FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LIMITED, SONE BHAWAN, 5TH FLOOR, BIRCHAND PATEL MARG, PATNA. With CWJC No.6823 of 2009 KRISHNA KUMAR SON OF SHRI SHIVANANDAN GRAIN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE LAXMIPUR, P.O. SAMEYA GARDH, P.S. GHOSAWARI, DISTRICT PATNA. Versus 1.BIHAR STATE CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, KHAWAJA IMALI, ANISABAD, PATNA. 2. MANAGING DIRECTOR, BIHAR STATE CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, KHAWAJA IMALI, ANISABAD, PATNA. ----------- 3 23-06-2009 The petitioners in both these writ petitions are employees of the Bihar State Construction Corporation Ltd. The said corporation, because of various reasons, could not find gainful engagement in respect of petitioner of C.W.J.C. No. 6821 of 2009. As per policy decision of the State Government the petitioner was then sent on deputation to the Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. The grievance of both the petitioners is that they are being made to retire on attaining age of 58 years. They submit that once the Corporation was founded it had to - 2 - frame the rules for its employees. The Corporation was and is a Government Corporation. Instead of framing of its own rules in relation to service conditions of its employees as far back as in the year 1976, the Board of Directors of Corporation took a conscious decision to adopt the rules framed by the State Government in relation to service conditions for Government employees. Till date no separate or independent rules have been made by the Corporation. As per the Government rules the age of superannuation was 58 years. Subsequently by a policy decision of the Government, Government amended rule 73 whereby it was now provided that the age of superannuation would be 60 years. This having been done, petitioners submit that the Government rules for its employees stood amended. It is these rules that were adopted by the corporation. No sooner there was an amendment in the Government rules the same automatically became applicable to the corporation as well. In my view the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is correct and must succeed. The exercise that was done by the Board of Corporation way back in the year 1976 is akin to referential legislation where any subsequent change in reference to the legislation automatically stands adopted. It is not a case of legislation by adoption. In my view no sooner the State Government amended its rules, i.e., rule 73 of the Bihar - 3 - Service Code, the age of superannuation of employees of the Bihar State Construction Corporation also stood amended and increased to 60 years. That is the decision of this Court in relation to this very corporation as well in several judgments. I accordingly hold that the petitioners would superannuate only on completion of 60 years and not before. It is open to the corporation to find out ways and means to pay the petitioners and provide them adequate work till they superannuate. With these observations these two writ applications are disposed of. BTiwary/ (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)