GIRIJA SHANKAR PANDA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner seeks for a declaration that he is entitled to continue in service till he reaches 60 years of age and as such entitled to continue upto 31.12.2000 in view of the policy decision of the Government of India.

(2.) THE brief fact of the petitioner's case is that he was working as a Director (Projects and Technology) in the National Aluminium Company Ltd. (Opp. Party No. 3), having been appointed by the Government of India by order dated 28.2.1995, a copy of which is Annexure -1. In terms of Annexure -1, the petitioner was to superannuate from service on attaining 58 years of age as on 31.12.1998 in accordance with the prevailing service Rules. The terms and conditions of service of the petitioner were stipulated under Annexure -2. The Government of India decided to enhance the age of superannuation from 58 to 60 years for all Government servants and also in respect of Board Level appointees of the Central Public Sector Undertaking Enterprises which includes Opp. Party No. 3, the National Aluminium Company Ltd. A copy of the decision of the Government is Annexure -3. The petitioner claims that he being a Director of the National Aluminium Company, (hereinafter called 'NALCO') is a Board Level appointee and, therefore, covered under the orders in Annexure -3. The opposite party No. 3 initiated necessary proposals in favour of the petitioner and requested the Government of India in the Department of Mines, to allow him to continue in service in terms of Annexure -3 vide letter dated 20.6.1998 (Annexure -4). The petitioner was expecting an appropriate order in his favour, but since he was reaching the age of 58 years by 31.12.1998; finding no other alternative, approached this Court.

(3.) IN view of the pleadings of the parties, the moot question that requires consideration is as to whether in terms of the office memorandum of the Government of India, Ministry of Industries, Department of Public Enterprises dated 30.5.1998 (Annexure -3), there is any scope for the administrative department to consider the case of individual officers at the Board level for their continuance.