Dismissed

Diwakar S/O Shri Rangnath Deshkar v. Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi and Others

Bombay HC27 Aug 2019WP/5872/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought continuation in service beyond retirement age. Court noted a subsequent Government order raising retirement age to 60 years, dismissing the petition as the grievance no longer subsisted. Petitioner directed to continue in service till attaining 60 years.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to continue in service beyond 31-08-2019 till he attains the age of 60 years.

Diwakar S/O Shri Rangnath Deshkar Vs Union of India… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

WP No.5872 of 2019

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.5872/2019 Diwakar Rangnath Deshkar

¶5

vs.

¶6

Union of India and ors.

¶7

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders

¶8

............................................................................................................................................ Shri. Ambarish Joshi, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri. U.M. Aurangabadkar, A.S.G.I. for respondent Nos. 1 to 4.

¶9

CORAM : R.K. DESHPANDE & VINAY JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 27^th August, 2019

¶10

The grievance of the petitioner in this petition is that he should be continued in service beyond 31-08-2019 till he attains the age of 60 years. Normally, the petitioner would retire upon completing the age of 57 years, being the member of Central Reserve Police Force.

¶11

Shri. Aurangabadkar, the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India, has produced before us the order dated 19-08-2019 passed by the Government of India Ministry of Home Affairs, determining the factors for raising the age of retirement of CRPF, BSF, ITBP, SSB, CISF, AR (regular cadre of Paramilitary

¶12

WP No.5872 of 2019

¶13

¶14

Component) to the age of 60 years, irrespective of the rank. Consequently, the petitioner would be entitled to continuation in service up to the age of 60 years. Hence, the grievance of the petitioner does not survive.

¶15

Needless to say that, if the petitioner does not receive the order of continuation in service on or before 31-08-2019, he shall be continued in service beyond 31-08-2019 till he attains the age of 60 years.

¶16

The petition stands dispose of.

¶17

JUDGEJUDGE

¶18

RGurnule

Diwakar S/O Shri Rangnath Deshkar v. Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Diwakar S/O Shri Rangnath Deshkar v. Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gayatri Wd/O Kunjilal Invate Vs Superntendent of Mines/ Manager Inder Colliey,Western Coal Fields Ltd.Kamptee and Others

Tatya S/O Pundlik Kolhe Vs Union of India, Thr. Private Secretary, for the Ministry of Defence, New Delhi and Others

Smt. Madhuri Ravindra Akulwar (Ku. Madanu Sadavali Boge) Vs Zilla Parishad, Gondia through Chief Executive Officer and Others

Smt. Jayawantabai Wd/O Hiraman Bankar Vs the Regional Executive Director, Airport Authority of India, Mumbai and Others

Shri Mangesh Vyankrao Joge Vs State of Maharashtra, through Its Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, Mumbai

Abhilesh S/O Mahesh Wakode Vs Maharashtra State Board of Technical Education, Mumbai through Director and Others