LAWS(KAR)-2009-9-36

NARAYANA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Decided On September 10, 2009
NARAYANA Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these writ petitions, the petitioners are seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to extend their age of superannuation from 58 years to 60 years in terms of the Government Order dated 28/7/2008. They have further sought for a declaration that the amendment to Rule 18(2) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Rules dated 17/9/2008 is illegal and contrary to Government Order dated 28/7/2008 and to direct the respondents to extend the benefit of amended Rule 18(2) w.e.f. 17/7/2008 as per the Government Order dated 28/7/2008.

(2.) The petitioners are the officers and employees of different Co-operative Societies in the State of Karnataka. The Co-operative Societies had adopted the age of retirement of its employees on par with the employees of the State Government. The State Government took a policy decision to extend the age of retirement of its employees from 58 to 60 years with effect from 17/7/2008 as per the Notification dated 28/7/2008. The said Notification was made applicable to the employees of the local bodies and aided educational institutions. The employees association of the Co-operative societies made a representation to the competent authority to enhance the age of superannuation of the officers and employers of Co-operative Societies to 60 years as per the representation dated 4.8.2008 (Annexure 'C' in W.P.No. 11469/2008). A draft Notification was issued by the State Government dated 28.8.2008 for amendment of Rule 18(2) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Rules (for short 'Rules') enhancing the age of retirement of the officers and employees of the Co-operative Societies to 60 years. Thereafter, a Notification was issued on 17/9/2008 amending Rule 18(2) by substituting the words "60 years" in place of "58 years". The said Notification came into force from the date of its publication. The petitioners have completed 58 years between 17/7/2008 to 1/9/2008. Therefore, they have filed these writ petitions contending that the amended Rule should have been brought into force with effect from 17/7/2009 as per the Government Order dated 28/7/2008.

(3.) The respondents have filed their statement of objections contending that the Government issued an order on 28/7/2008 enhancing the age of retirement from 5 8 years to 60 years with effect from 17/7/2008 applicable to the employees of the State Government, local bodies and aided educational institutions. The said Notification does not apply to the officers and employees of the Co-operative societies. Every Co-operative Society is obliged to apply for and obtain registration under the provisions of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (for short 'the Act'). The management of the Society vests in its General Body/Managing Committee. The Bye-laws, Rules and Regulations of a Co-operative Society shall be in accordance with the objects of the Society and shall not be contrary to the provisions of the Act or the Rules made thereunder. The Managing Committee has accordingly formulated Subsidiary Rules governing the service conditions of its employees. Section 129 enables the State Government to make Rules for the whole or any part of the State and for any class of Co-operative Societies after previous publication and by Notification in the Official Gazette. Section 129(2)(o) provides for framing Rules regarding recruitment and conditions of service of employees of Co-operative Societies. Rule 18(2) states that the compulsory retirement of an Officer or employee of any Co-operative Society is the date on which he attains the age of 58 years. The State Government has issued a draft Notification dated 28.8.2008 for amendment of Rule 18 by providing the age of retirement at 60 years instead of 58 years. The amendment will come into force only upon publication and Notification in the Official Gazette as required under Section 129 of the Act. They have sought for dismissal of the writ petitions.