WP(C) 3554/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B. K. SHARMA Heard Mr. J. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. U. Baruah, leaned Standing Counsel, ASTC. The petitioner has since retired from service of the Corporation on atta ining the age of 59 years. However, he claims that the retirement age should hav e been extended upto 60 years. In this connection, the petitioner has referred t o the recommendation of the Chairman, ASTC, vide his Annexure-5 note dated 28.6. 2008, by which it was held that the employees of the ASTC are entitled to enhanc ement of retirement age up to 60 years. On the other hand, Ms. U. Baruah, learne d Standing Counsel, ASTC, submits that such amendment upto 60 years has not been approved by the Board of Directors of the Corporation. In this connection, she referred to the order of this Court passed on 4.3.2011 in WP(C) 1029/2011, by wh ich, similar claim was rejected. If the Corporation has not adopted any policy decision to enhance the re tirement age of its employees upto 60 years, this Court cannot issue any directi on for such enhancement of retirement age of the employees of the Corporation be ing 59 years, the employees will have to retire from service on attaining the ag e of 59 years. The petitioner having attained such age i.e. 59 years, he has bee n made to retire from service. In view of the above, no relief can be granted to the petitioner and acc ordingly, this writ petition is dismissed.