AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard. The appellant has filed this appeal against the order dated 03-11-2009 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No. 2956/2008 (S).
The appellant challenged the order of retirement before the writ Court on the ground that he was eligible to continue in service up to the age of 60 years on account of enhancement of age vide notification dated 31-07-2008. The learned Single Judge rejected the writ petition of the appellant on the ground that the amendment in the regulation of the Board in regard to enhancement of age of an employee came to effect w.e.f. 31-07-2008. Because the appellant was retired from service w.e.f. 30-06-2008 prior to the aforesaid notification, hence, the appellant is not eligible to get the benefit of amendment of regulation in regard to enhancement of age of retirement.
It is an admitted fact that the appellant attained the age of superannuation w.e.f. 30-06-2008. The Board passed a resolution in regard to enhancement of age of officers of Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti from 58 years to 60 years in its meeting held on 27-05-2008. It is mentioned in the resolution that the Managing Director is authorized to make necessary amendment in the regulation in this regard. Consequently, the Managing Director issued an order dated 31-07-2008 and by the aforesaid order, in the regulation of the Board, named as "Rajya Mandi Board Sewa Viniyam, 1998 [hereinafter referred to as" Regulation, 1998], an amendment has been made effective in Clause 27(3)(1) of Regulation, 1998 by which the age of the officers of Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti has been increased up-to the age of 60 years. It is mentioned in the order that the amendment shall be made effective from the date of order i.e. 31-07-2008.
Learned counsel for the appellants has contended that the Board has passed the resolution on 27-05-2008. Hence, the amendment deemed to be made effective from the date of passing of the resolution. He further contended that earlier also, the amendments were made applicable from the date of passing of resolution and the Managing Director has no power to fix another date because he is Ex-Officio Secretary of the Board in accordance with the provisions of Section 42(b) of Madhya Pradesh Krishi Upaj Mandhi Adhiniyam, 1972.
In the present case, the Board has not fixed any date in regard to amendment in the regulation fixing the age of retirement. It authorized the Managing Director to make necessary amendment in the regulation and consequently, the Managing Director issued an order making amendment in the regulation and it has been made effective from the date of order. When the Board itself authorized the Managing Director then it could not be said that the amendment be considered from the date of passing of the order. Hence, in our opinion, there is no illegality in the order impugned. The writ appeal is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.