(1.) Heard. Rule in both the writ petitions. By consent, the rule in both the writ petitions made returnable forthwith. Respondents waive service. By consent, both the petitions are taken up for hearing and final disposal at the admission stage itself.
(2.) In both the above writ petitions, the petitioners primarily question the order of extension of service of the Chief Secretary, State of Maharashtra, Mumbai, vide order dated 30th May, 2009 Exhibit-A. Writ Petition No. 3568 of 2009 had been filed at Aurangabad Bench of this High Court, while Writ Petition Lodging No. 63 of 2009 has been filed at the Principal Bench. Vide order dated 17th June, 2009, both these petitions were ordered to be listed and heard together as common question of law is raised in these petitions and somewhat common reliefs are sought. Thus, by this judgment, we will dispose of both the petitions together.
(3.) The petitioners in both these petitions claim to be public spirited persons, one is a Journalist and Social Worker, while the other was Social Journalist in the past and is Lawyer at present and both of them, in the past, have taken up various issues of public importance by filing public interest litigations in the Courts. Shri Johny Joseph, the Chief Secretary of the State of Maharashtra is stated to have attained the age of 60 years on 29th May, 2009, his date of birth being 29th May, 1949. Upon attaining that age, he would superannuate from the service on 30th May, 2009. However, the Union of India upon recommendation of the State of Maharashtra through the Principal Secretary, General Administrative Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai, extended the period of superannuation of the said respondent. In Writ Petition No. 3568 of 2009, the petitioner thus challenges the impugned order of extension on the ground that the same is not in public interest and is even contrary to the judgment of the High Court dated 29th April, 2009 passed in PIL No. 85 of 2008. According to this petitioners, the extension is only for political reason and is not covered under Rule 16(1) of the All India Services (Death-cum-Retirement Benefit) Rules, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the said "Rules") and no extension in any case could be granted exceeding a period of three months even in public interest. Thus, it is prayed that this order be set aside, eligible officers from the IAS existing cadre should be considered for being selected to the post of Chief Secretary, Maharashtra State and the extension order should not be given effect to.