PET E? IONER m THE HIGH COURaggJmIcA’ggig 2W BILAsugUR gc &) wR TT wai £323. . _ . .__/.2.G.Q.3 @ {Q‘wV/ g J.&g L f“ u V'Raanegshyam . Yadu we Mangal Ram Yatlu, aged about 58 years. Ex~accountant, Panchsheel Nagar C lubpara. ward , Mah asamuncl (C .G-.) State oi Chhattisgarh Through : $ecretary, Pamhayat & Gramin VikaS Department, Mantr a1 aya, D . K.S , Bhawan, Raipur (C .G.) The ChieE Execwaive Officer Jila Panchayat, MahaSamund The Collecrtor, Maha$amund UNDER WICLE 2254§é7¢hF ill-$3: C&QSTL'T‘UTION m :3? Pggn ION GE ILGD IA E igtt . Mahasamunf£ (C .G ,) 7X /f’ f ' 7 “r-‘m i XI‘HC-ZZ 3am, mm, WW Shn' Y‘ C, Shaima, Counsg‘tl Shu‘ Sanjay K Agalwal, notice. 011 behalf 0f the Sfate. Heard. By thiS petition filed undsr Artideig 226/ 227 of the Constitution of India tha pet‘itioner has challengad the order datcd 6.6.2003 Ammxum P/ 1 JPassad‘ by the R€spondcnt No.2 by which it has bggn ordered that undor Rule 33 of Chham'sgarh Pa11chayat Service. (RocnlitmJmt arld Goneral Conditions of SorviceS) Rulos, 1999 on attammg the age of superannuafion’ the petitioner would be deemed to be retired from 30th June, 2003. Learned counSel for the petitioner Submits that the petitioner iS working as Accomitant iii Zila Pemchavat . Mahasamund. A3 per the Rules'ptevailixtg in the depaxtment he is entitled to continue till the completion of 6G years of age. The respondent No.1 has earlier iSsued a memo/order 8.4.2002 (Annexure Pf 2) and directed the r for th€ petitioner. Deputy Advocate General takes respondents No. '2 and 3 to send proposals with legard to allowing benefit of Fifth Pay Commission, pension and age )f supei‘aimuation. In compliaiice of the said order dt. 8.4.2002 'the Z-ila Panchayat, Mahasamund has passed a resolution on 25th February 2003 and agreed to extend the age of superannuation of Class—III employees from 58 years to 60 years and Class-EV employees from 60 years to 6'2 years. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that mam \W 200 tea mmmefea WW§WW a: 31W am 36.06.2083 XI-HC—22 aiha'g‘rm ‘wlp 1ggL/a3 mm W 200 Without taking the consent of the E impugned d1. 66.2003 has beEn 1' Offlcsr (Respondent No.2) and 011 Pf3 aml Pf4 mark by the. petitione: the respendents. The main content pctitioner is that smce the Respom propoeals Vide order/memo dt. 8.4 that orderf‘memo the Respondent N on 25.2.2003 and agreed to eeend the Class HI employee from 58 to 6£ contrary to the said resolution, suetainable in the eves of law and 1999 the petitioner 1S entihed to Ci age of 6O years. ; In this connection Rule 3: (Recruitment and General Conditlm relevant'which reads as under: “Rule 33 Age of Supermmu; superannuation for Pancha than teaching stah' and clae ’ be 58 Veal‘s. . For teachin employees age of superam‘ V6 31’s . (2) In exceptional cases with of prestribed authon'ty Pand xecutive Committee the order 3sued by the Chief Executive the representations Annexure ‘ no action has been taken by on of learned counsel for the lent No. 1 has alreadv invited H2002 and in compliance of 0.2 has passed the resolution the age of superannuation of ) years, the order impugned is arbitraiy, illegal and not as per Rule 33 of the Rules, pntinue till completion of the § of the Panchayat Sewice 1s of Services) Rules 1999 is ationb (l) The age of lyat employees other ‘s IV employees, shall g staff ancLclass I'V luation shall be 60 the prior permission thayat can extend the f WW1§WWA §§3XTRW3W ‘ \ my of its employee for .‘S. age of superannuation of é maximum period of two y6a‘ Provided that extgns V6ar will not be sanctioned i A bare perusal of the abow provision reveals that as per sub 11116 (1) ags .of supErannuation for Palachayat employ-36S other than teaching staff and class IV employees shall he 58 years, and in the present case admittedly, the staff nor a claeS IV employee thc employee the age of retirement is 5; provides that in exceptional caees x prescribed authority, the Panchayat can extend the age of superannuation of any of its emp” yee for a maximum period of two years, This suberule does ot give absolute right to an employee to continue beyond. the g6 of retirement as prescribed in sub—rule (1). The concerned P chayat can extend the age of any of its employee for two years only in exceptional cases that too with the permission of Pres Iibed Authority and for that puipose the Panchayat would ha e to make out an exceptional case and. for making out an excepti nal case The Panchavat has to look into (i) Whether the petitione s age of superannuation is to be extended in public interest loo ' 1g to the exigency of work, (ii) the past service record as well as the conduct of the employee, ion of more than one 1t a time”. petitioner is neither a teaching refoie for him being class 111 3 vears. Sub~ru1e (2) of Rule 33 with the prior permission of the. l XLHC-22 341w LAD . .............................. ............. W ck? ..... .......m 290 W y W A\D ‘ Aggy/jg mmwm WW fg‘érmR aqaxwm work. Thus sub—r1116. {2) does n employ€6 to ciajm for extension Even this sub—rule does not give ajhy power to the respondents to articular employee as per their sting the requirement and split extond the age of rafiremem of a I sweet will or ordinarilv Without me of sub-rule. It 1's T1116 that ths potitione: the mSpondentS but it is for thsm 1 the petitioner’s seivices are required to be extended as per sub— ii‘ the respondents must take in rule (2) or not a11d that'decision o a11 objective manner. Since the» respondent No.2 t retiring the petitioner wef. 30.6 superannuation Le. 58 years as pr: Rule 33 of the Chhattisgarh Pane] General Conditions of Services) impugned does not reflect that th Within the purview of sub—rule (2) ( this Court no right accnies to the ] of his age of superannuation. In the result, the petition ht liable which V>is to be and as no force, it is misconceived is dismissed. Consequently, M.W.P.No.1700/2003 for ad—intezim relief and I.A.No.5622[08 also stand disposed of. 3t give absolute right to any of his age of superannuation. f has made representations to :o take a decision as to whether .as" already issued the order for 2003 on attaining the age of )Vided under sub—rule (l) of the 1ayat Service (Recruitment and Rules 1999 and the order e case of the petitioner comes if the Rule 33, in the opinion of )etitioner to Claim fer exten sion Sd/— L L.C.BHADOO 1 Judge [aiséfeil