VIJAY KUMAR GROVER Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of impugned order, petitioner, who is admittedly a Group 'C' employee, has been retired on attaining the age of 58 years in accordance with Regulation 37 of U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Employees (other than Officers) Service Regulations, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as "1981 Regulations").

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that under Government Order dated 20.12.2011 the State Government has taken a policy decision in extending the age of retirement from 58 to 60 years and, therefore, petitioner is entitled to be retired at the age of 60 years and cannot be made to retire at 58 years.

(3.) The submission is thoroughly misconceived. It is admitted that statutory provision has not been amended so far. Government order, being an executive order cannot override a statutory provision. It is well settled that whenever Rules or Regulations provide something, it cannot be overridden by an executive order. An executive order can be issued and enforced only where the statutory provision is silent to fill in the gap but not to be supplemented. In Indra Sawhney and others Vs. Union of India and others, 1992 Supp3 SCC 217the Apex Court held that though the executive orders can be issued to fill up the gaps in the rules if the rules are silent on the subject but the executive orders cannot be issued which are inconsistent with the statutory rules already framed. In Laxman Dundappa Dhamanekar and another Vs. Management of Vishwa Bharata Seva Smithi and another, 2001 8 JT 171also the same view was taken. In K. Kuppusamy and another Vs. State of T.N. and others, 1998 8 SCC 469the Court said that statutory rules cannot be overridden by executive orders or executive practice and merely because the government has taken a decision to amend the rules does not mean that the rule stood obligated. So long as the rules are not amended in accordance with the procedure prescribed under law the same would continue to apply and would have to be observed in words and spirit. In Chandra Prakash Madhavrao Dadwa and others Vs. Union of India and others, 1998 8 SCC 154also the Apex Court expressed the same view holding that the executive orders cannot be conflicted with the statutory rules of 1977.