STATE OF BIHAR Vs. SURESH JHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE heard Mr. Lalit Kishore, AAG -III.

(2.) THE appeal suffers from delay of 34 days. For condonation thereof an interlocutory application (I.A. No. 3358 of 2008) has been made. Even if we condone the delay, we are of the view that the appeal at the instance of the State Government and its functionaries, is wholly frivolous and devoid of any substance. The following facts are not disputed by the Additional Advocate General -Ill:

(3.) IN the backdrop of the aforesaid admitted facts, it would be seen that the petitioner 'sservice in the State of Jharkhand until he was relieved on 9.6.2005 did not suffer from any illegality. The 29th March, 2005 order issued by the Central Government could not operate adverse to the petitioner as by that time, he has not been allocated State of Bihar as per his option. It is an admitted position that by this time (i.e., 9.6.2005) when the respondent no.1 was relieved by the State of Jharkhand, the State of Bihar had already enhanced the superannuation age of its employees to 60 years. The relevant date for finding out the age of superannuation, in the facts and circumstances, would be either 9.6.2005 when the State of Jharkhand relieved him or 16.6.2005 when he joined the service in the State of Bihar. On both these dates, the superannuation age has been enhanced by the State of Bihar to 60. years.