AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Nisar Ahmad Kakru, J.—The petitioner a lineman in the Power Development Department is sought to be superannuated on retirement at the
age of 58 years by impugned communication which is called in question by medium of this writ petition on the ground that lineman's post is borne
on the inferior service therefore entitled to continuation till he attains age of sixty years. Contesting the claim it is averred by the respondents in their
reply that a 'Lineman' does not come, within the purview of, inferior service. In this backdrop, the case turns around the interpretation of
Regulation-226 of the rules called the ""Jammu & Kashmir Civil Service Regulations, 1956"" and provisos I & II attached thereto relevant to the
controversy in issue which may be extracted:
226 [(1)] An officer shall retire compulsory on his ataining the age of 55 years, Unless the competent authority considers him efficient and permits
him to remain in service]. He may, however, be retained in service after the date of compulsory retirement with the sanction of the Government on
public grounds which must be recorded in writing but he must not be retained after the age of 60 years except in very special circumstances:
Provided that the Government servants who were in service on 10-10-1966 and were treated inferior as per Schedule II, will retire on attaining the
age of 60 years.
Provided further that a Government servant in service on 1,1.1987 or appointed on or after that date shall retire his attaining the age of 58 years.
The phraseology employed in the Rule being so simple the intent of the statute maker need not be unfolded by any interpretative process. The
rule admits no ambiguity. It can be understood in its grammatical meaning without any difficulty. From its plain reading what is deducible is that a
Government servant has a right to continue in Service till he attains the age of 55 years but as per the proviso I attached to the Regulation 226 the
continuation would extend to sixty years in case the Government servant falls within the ambit of inferior service provided he was as in service as
on 10.10.1966. Thus it emerges that Proviso I would become applicable in two eventualities one:
(a) that he is a member of inferior service as per schedule II of the J&K Civil Service Regulations 1956.
(b) the other that he was in service on 10.10.1966.
It goes without saying that absence of either of the conditions shall render the Government servant disentitled to the benefit of the proviso 1.
Considering the case of the petitioner on the touchstone of analysis of the proviso 1, the objection raised by respondents that the post of 'Lineman'
does not fall within definition of inferior service pales into insignificance for the petitioner has himself averred in his pleadings that he is an appointee
of 1971 (see para 2 of writ petition). Obviously he has entered the service after 10.10.1966 therefore, he cannot invoke Proviso 1 for his retention
in service beyond 55 years of age but he does fall within the four corners of the proviso 11 which envisages retirement of a Government servant on
his attaining the age of 58 years if he was in service on 01.01.1987 or was appointed on or after that date. It needs a reitration that the petitioner is
an appointee of 1971 and was admittedly in service on 01.01.1987, therefore, he is entitled to derive the 01.01.1987 benefit of proviso II entitling
him to continuation until he attains the age of 58 years.
Viewed thus relief sought for continuation in terms of Proviso I to Regulation 226 of the J&K Civil Service Regulations, 1956 is declined. Writ
petition is dismissed along with all connected CMPs. Interim direction is vacated. No order as to costs.