N N PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner who was an officer of the state Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur has filed this petition praying that the order refusing extension in service to the petitioner passed by the respondent Bank be quashed and set aside. With regard to his prayer that the order of compulsory retirement be quashed and set aside learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner agrees that the petitioner was not compulsorily retired but extension in service wag not given to him

(2.) In any view no direction can be given to the Bank for extending the services of the petitioner. It is the sole discretion of the employer State or otherwise. This point is covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur & Ors. v. Jag Mohan Lal reported in 1988 (2) Bank CLR 529. Hence there is no substance in this petition.

(3.) The Supreme Court has held that an employee has no right to remain in service beyond the age of superannuation and therefore he cannot claim extension as a matter of right. The Supreme Court has also considered proviso to Regulation 19(1) of the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur (Officers) Service Regulations 1979 and held as under;