STATE OF WEST BENGAL Vs. WALI AHMED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated February 12, 1991 passed by Mahitosh Majumder J. in C.O. No. 16273 (W) of 1988, whereby and whereunder the said said learned Court allowed the writ application filed by the writ Petitioner.

(2.) Originally, the writ -Petitioner was an employee of the State of Bihar. On transfer of territories of the then Manbhum District in the year 1956, the original writ -Petitioner became an employee of the State of. West Bengal in terms of the provisions of Bihar and West Bengal Transfer of Territories Act, 1956. In terms of Sub -section (1) of Sec. 41 of the said Act, all employees who immediately before the appointed day was serving in connection with the affairs of Bihar shall as from that day, continue so to serve, unless he was required by general or special order of the Central Government to serve provisionally in connection with the affairs of West Bengal. The proviso appended to Sub -section (4) of Sec. 41 postulates that the condition of service applicable immediately before the appointed day to the case of any person provisionally or finally allotted to West Bengal under this Sec. shall not be varied to his disadvantage except with the previous approval of the Central Government. It is not disputed that the age of retirement of the original writ -Petitioner was 60 years while he had been serving under the State of Bihar. Such age of retirement so far as the employees of the State of West Bengal are concerned is 58. This Court has consistently held that in absence of any order passed by the Central Government in terms of proviso appended to Sub -section (4) of Sec. 42 of the said Act the age of superannuation of the such employees would be 60 and not 58.

(3.) Ms Sengupta, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State -Appellant raised two contentions in support of this appeal. The learned Counsel has drawn our attention to two notifications issued by the State of Bihar; one dated September 22, 1972 and another dated January 11, 1963 and submits on the basis thereof that from a perusal thereof it would appear that the age of retirement of the employees other than ministerial staff had been raised from 55 to 58 in the State of Bihar also. The learned Counsel, therefore, contends that it must be held that the original writ -Petitioner was to retire on attaining the age of 58. Our attention has also been drawn to Sec. 42 of the said Act which reads thus: