ANDREW GOMES Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a Charge Hand Welder working under the respondents. He is aggrieved by the order superannuating the petitioner with effect from 31.12.2010 on attaining 58 years of age. According to the petitioner, as per the standing orders applicable as amended by Ext.P3 order dated 11.5.2010, the age of retirement has been enhanced to 60 years in the second respondent's establishment and therefore, the petitioner is not liable to be retired at the age of 58 years and the petitioner is entitled to continue in service till he attains 60 years of age.

(2.) I have heard the learned Standing Counsel for the second respondent also. The learned Standing Counsel on instructions submits that although Ext.P3 order has been passed by the Regional Labour Commissioner(Central), Cochin directing amendment of the standing orders enhancing the age of retirement of the workers of the second respondents as 60 years, against Ext.P3 order, the second respondent has filed an appeal, which is pending. Therefore, by virtue of Section 7 of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, Ext.P3 order of amendment has not yet come into force and therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to continue in service beyond 58 years of age is the contention raised.

(3.) THE second respondent shall allow the petitioner to continue in service pending consideration of the appeal stated to have been filed by the second respondent against Ext.P3 order. But, he shall not be paid salary for the present. If ultimately the appeal is dismissed, the petitioner shall be paid salary for the period he worked also and he shall be continued in service till 60 years of age subject of course to the right of the second respondent to challenge the appellate order before the appropriate authorities.