(1.) The 2nd respondent in the writ petition is the appellant before this Court. The grievance is in respect of the last sentence in the interim order dated 26.06.2018, whereby the learned Single Judge has made an observation, after declining the interim relief that the petitioners will be free to continue under the 2nd respondent beyond the age of the prescribed retirement age, at their risk, without payment of salary.
(2.) The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the said observation adversely affects the rights and interest of the appellant Board and also the eligible employees, who are awaiting appointment/promotion to the post in question.
(3.) The sum and substance of the case projected before this Court is that the appellant Board, considering various aspects, decided to enhance the retirement age of the employees from 56 years to 58 years and the resolution taken in this regard was sent to the Government for approval. The Government considered the matter and it was rejected as per Ext.P23, which made the aggrieved persons to approach this Court by filing WP(C) No.20939 of 2018, challenging the order on various grounds. The reliefs sought for in the writ petition are as follows: