Hon''ble Devendra Kumar Arora, J.@mdashHeard Ms. Savita Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. I.P. Singh, learned counsel for the
opposite party nos.2 to 4.
2. The petitioner, who has joined in the U. P. Jal Nigam on 25.5.1978 on the post of Junior Engineer, is going to attain the age of superannuation
on 31.12.2011, on completion of 58 years.
3. Submission of the petitioner is that he should have been asked to retire on attaining the age of 60 years, as the State Government vide its
notification dated 28.11.2001 enhanced the age of superannuation of Government Servants from 58 to 60 years.
4. According to the petitioner, age of superannuation of employees of U.P. Jal Nigam, before 28.11.2001 was 58 years parallel to State
Government Employees, in view of the provisions of Regulation-31 of Service Regulations of U. P. Jal Nigam. However, the State Government
denied the aforesaid benefit to the employees of Nigam.
5. Mr. I. P. Singh, learned counsel for U. P. Jal Nigam states that the department has taken decision to appoint the retired employees like
petitioner, who were regular employees on contract basis for six months.
6. It is not in dispute that when some employees were not given the benefit of 60 years by the Department, they approached the High Court
leading case of which was Writ Petition No.1595 (SB) 2009, B. N. Chakravarty vs. State of U.P. and Others. The said bunch of writ petitions
regarding the age of retirement were allowed vide judgment and order dated 29.7.2010. Against the said judgment, the State of U.P. preferred
SLP before the Apex Court titled as State of U.P. vs. Dayanand Chakrawarty and Others and the Hon''ble Supreme Court was pleased to grant
interim stay vide order dated 13.12.2010. It is also not disputed that the Board of Directors, U.P. Jal Nigam itself took the decision on 20.6.2011
to appoint employees who are retiring at the age of 58 years on contract basis. Further, the Apex Court in U. P. Jal Nigam and Another vs. Ghana
Ram Verma, vide order dated 8.7.2011 and in U.P. Jal Nigam and Another vs. Virendra Nath Gupta and Others vide order dated 11.7.2011
provided that such employees may be allowed to work on contract basis till they attain the age of 60 years. It is relevant to mention that after the
aforesaid orders, this Court, in number of writ petitions, directed for giving the aforesaid benefit. Therefore, the petitioner is also entitled for the
same benefit as his case is squarely covered by the aforesaid orders. In view of the aforesaid facts and reasons and the orders of the Apex Court,
this writ petition is disposed of finally with a direction to the opposite parties to appoint the petitioner after attaining the age of superannuation, as
directed by the Apex Court, as an interim measure in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s). 10663/2011 U. P. Jal Nigam and Another versus
Ghana Ram Verma and Another, vide order dated 8.7.2011, if there is no other legal impediment.