ANTONY A J Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed with the following prayers:-

(2.) The contention of the petitioners, who are officers of the Staff of the High Court of Kerala, is that the age of retirement now fixed as per Section 2 of the Kerala High Court Services (Determination of Retirement Age) Act, 2008 is too low and is therefore discriminatory, arbitrary, irrational and is liable to be struck down. It is contended that the Chief Justice had recommended the raising of the age of superannuation to 58 and the rejection of the proposal by the Government is unsustainable in view of the clear provisions of Article 229(2) of the Constitution of India.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the large volume of the case laws pertaining to the issue of age of retirement and the factors which have to be taken into account for deciding the viability of such age. Pleadings have been placed on record by the 1st respondent as well as impleaded additional respondents 4 to 6. I notice that this Court in its decision reported in Valsakumari v. State of Kerala, 2008 1 Kerala Law Times 672 had considered the issue of the power to issue ordinance retaining the age of retirement of staff of High Court at par with the retirement age of Government servants. This Court had held that the legislature had the competence to pass a law fixing the age of retirement of the staff of the High Court and that such law, even if it is later in date to a recommendation made by the Chief Justice under Article 229(2) would prevail over such recommendation and would be binding on the members of the staff of the High Court as well. It was further held that the Kerala High Court Services (Determination of Retirement Age) Ordinance 2007 (Kerala) is consolidated and valid.