KESHAV PRASAD LAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS special appeal is preferred against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 19 -1 -2001 in Writ Petition No. 2354 of 2001, whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition challenging the office order notice dated 23 -12 -2000 retiring the petitioner with effect from 31 -1 -2001 on attaining the age of 58 years.

(2.) THE short question involved in the present appeal is as to whether the age of retirement of Consolidation Lekhpal is 60 years or 58 years.

(3.) IT appears that the petitioner -appellant was appointed as Consolidation Lekhpal on 11 -10 -1979 in the pay -scale of Rs. 330 -7 -365 -8 -381 -405 -9 -450 in the district of Basti. It is not in dispute that his date of birth is 10 -1 -1943. He was, however, served with the office order notice dated 23rd January, 2001 informing that in view of Rule 5 of Volume II Part -II to IV of Financial Hand Book and also in view of the instructions issued from time to time by the State Government he would retire on 31 -1 -2001 on attaining 58 years of age. Being aggrieved the petitioner challenged the aforesaid order/notice before this Court by moving Writ Petition No. 2354 of 2001 on the ground, inter alia, that the post of Consolidation Lekhpal belongs to Group -D posts as described under Rule 2 of the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation Lekhpal Service Rules, 1978, and therefore, in view of the provisions contained in Rule 56 of Fundamental Rules he can only be superannuated on attaining 60 years of age. The learned Single Judge having heard learned Counsel for the parties and relying on a judgment of this Court in the case of Rajendra Prasad Tiwari v. State of U.P. and others, reported in 2000 (4) Educational Service Cases 2309 (Allahabad), held that after the revision of the pay -scale with effect from 1st January, 1996 the petitioner cease to be an employee belonging to 'Group -D' Category and therefore, he cannot continue in service upto the age of 60 years.