VITHAL V GAITONDE Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant before us claims to have been appointed on 11-6-1962 as an Operator (Temporary) in the Government of Goa. The said country became liberated on 19-12-1961 and was annexed to the territory of India. The appellant challenged an order dated 6-10-1993/6-1-1994 by which he was informed that he would attain the age of superannuation on 31-1-1994. He has since retired on 31-1-1994.

(2.) The contention put forth by the appellant is that he had been appointed in terms of Article 63 read with Article 26A of the Statute of the Overseas Functionaries and, therefore, his age of retirement should be considered in accordance with Clause 430 (Chapter VII) of the ESTATUTO DO FUNCTIONALISMO ULTRAMARINO, which fixed the age of retirement as 60 years. The appellant claims that he having been appointed in terms of the Portuguese Law, he should be allowed to retire only at the age of 60 years and his representation made to the respondents having been rejected on more than one occasion, he approached the Tribunal.

(3.) The Tribunal did not agree with the appellant that he is governed by the Portuguese Statute of the Overseas Functionaries and he is governed by the Central Government Rules. The respondents contended that the appellant is not an absorbed employee and hence his request to retire him at the age of 60 years would not arise.