Allowed

Prasadu P v. the State of Ap and 5 Ors.

Gauhati HC20 Sept 2022WP(C)/189/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, drivers under the Arunachal Pradesh State Social Welfare Board, challenged letters ordering their retirement at age 58. The Court held the Board must follow State Government rules requiring retirement age of 60 years and set aside the impugned orders. Petitions allowed.

What did the court decide?

Set aside letters ordering retirement at age 58; directed respondents to allow petitioners to retire upon attaining age of 60 years.

Prasadu P Vs the State of Ap and 5 Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/6

¶2

GAHC040008242022

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 189/2022

¶5

1:Prasadu P S/o Late Parbhakaran N

¶6

Presently serving as Driver under Arunachal Pradesh State Social Welfare Board Naharlagun District Papum Pare Arunachal Pradesh Mobile No. 7005199910

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE STATE OF AP and 5 Ors. Represented by the Chief Secretary Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh Itanagar

¶9

2:The Secretary Department of Women and Child Development Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh Itanagar

¶10

3:The Chairman/Chairperson D Sector APSSWB Naharlagun Arunachal Pradesh.

¶11

4:The Secretary APSSWB G Extension Naharlagun

¶12

Page No.# 2/6

¶13

Arunachal Pradesh. 5:The Union of India Represented by the Secretary Ministry of Women and Child Development New Delhi 6:The Executive Director Central Social Welfare Board B-12 Qutub Institutional Area New Delhi Advocate for the Petitioner : Taba Tagum Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP) Linked Case : WP(C) 365/2020 1:SadhuCharan Das PRESENTLY SERVING AS DRIVER UNDER ARUANACHAL PRADESH STATE SOCIAL WELFARE BOARD NAHARLAGUN DIST. PAPUM PARE AP. VERSUS 1:The State of AP and 5 Others REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVT. OF AP ITANAGAR. 2:THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT GOVT. OF AP ITANAGAR. 3:THE CHAIRPERSON APSSWB (ARUNACHAL PRADESH STATE SOCIAL WELFARE BOARD)NAHARLAGUN AP. 4:THE SECRETARY APSSWB (ARUNACHAL PRADESH STATE LEVEL SOCIAL WELFARE BOARD G-EXTENSION NAHARLAGUN

¶14

Page No.# 3/6

¶15

AP.

¶16

5:THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT AP. 6:THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CENTRAL SOCIAL WELFARE BOARD B-12 QUTUB INSTITUTIONAL AREA NEW DELHI.

¶17

Advocate for the Petitioner : R B Yadav Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP)

¶18

BEFORE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Date : 20-09-2022

¶21

Heard Mr. R. B. Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C)No.365/2020 and Mr. T. Tagum, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C)No. 189/2022. Also heard Mr. S. Tapin, learned Senior Government Advocate for the State respondents and Mr. T. Deliyang, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. M. Kato, learned ASGI representing the respondent nos. 5 & 6.

¶22

A challenge has been made to the letter dated 06.11.2020, issued by the Secretary, Arunachal Pradesh State Social Welfare Board, vide APSSWB/Estt-186/84/114, to the petitioner in WP(C) No. 365/2020, whereby, he has been asked to go on retirement on 31.12.2020 on attaining superannuation at the age of 58 years and the letter dated 29.03.2022, issued by the Secretary, Arunachal Pradesh State Social

¶23

Page No.# 4/6

¶24

Welfare Board, vide APSSWB/GEN-37/S.C.Das/2021/415, whereby, the petitioner in WP(C) No. 189/2022 has also been asked to go on retirement on 31.05.2022 on attaining superannuation at the age of 58 years. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner in WP(C) No. 189/2022 have also been released from service vide order dated 31.05.2022, issued by the Chairperson, Arunachal Pradesh State Social Welfare Board, vide Memo No. APSSWB/ESTT/108/86/17.

¶25

Both the petitioners are working as drivers in the Arunachal Pradesh State Social Welfare Board.

¶26

In assailing the aforesaid letters, whereby, both the petitioners have been asked to go on retirement on attaining the age of 58 years, the petitioners have relied on Rule 10 (VIII) of “the Rules of the State Social Welfare Boards”, wherein, it has been provided that the employees of the State Board will be governed by the State Government Rules in terms of their service conditions. On the basis of the aforesaid Rules, the petitioners contend that since the rules of retirement of the State Government employee is 60 years, the Arunachal Pradesh State Social Welfare Board is also required to follow the said rules and by following the said rules, the petitioners cannot be asked to go on retirement on attaining the age of 58 years and the petitioners can only be asked to go on retirement on attaining the age of 60 years as in the case of other State Government employees.

¶27

The petitioner in WP(C)No. 189(AP)2022, in his additional-affidavit, has produced a letter dated 11.07.2022, issued by the Joint Director, Central Social Welfare Board, Ministry of Women and Child

¶28

Page No.# 5/6

¶29

Development, Government of India, vide File No. (e-47423) CSWB12/31/2018-O/o AD(FO)/723, whereby, it has been written to the Officer-in-Charge, Arunachal Pradesh State Social Welfare Board, Naharlagun, that the Board should follow the rules of retirement of the State Government employees, which is 60 (sixty) years. The aforesaid letter dated 11.07.2022, written to the Officer-in-charge of Arunachal Pradesh State Social Welfare Board, Naharlagun, by the Joint Director of Central Social Welfare Board, Ministry of Women and Child Development, Government of India, has clearly directed the Arunachal Pradesh State Social Welfare Board to follow the retirement rules of the State Government employees.

¶30

Mr. T. Deliyang, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. M. Kato, learned ASGI representing the respondent nos. 5 & 6, has submitted that he is also in receipt of the instructions from the Central Social Welfare Board that the Arunachal Pradesh State Social Welfare Board is required to follow the rules of age of retirement of the State of Arunachal Pradesh Government employees.

¶31

In view of the letter dated 11.07.2022 and also taking into account the submission made by Mr. Deliyang, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. M. Kato, learned ASGI, the position as regards the retirement age of the employees of the Arunachal Pradesh State Social Welfare Board has now become clear that the employees of the Arunachal Pradesh State Social Welfare Board are also to be retired on attaining the age of 60 years as in the case of the Government employees of the State of Arunachal Pradesh.

¶32

Page No.# 6/6

¶33

In view of the above, both the writ petitions are hereby disposed of by setting aside the aforesaid 2 (two) letters, i.e., letter dated 06.11.2020, issued by the Secretary, Arunachal Pradesh State Social Welfare Board, vide APSSWB/Estt-186/84/114 and letter, dated 29.03.2022, issued by the Secretary, Arunachal Pradesh State Social Welfare Board, vide APSSWB/GEN-37/S.C.Das/2021/415, with further direction to the respondent authorities, more particularly, the Arunachal Pradesh State Social Welfare Board, to let both the petitioners go on retirement only on attaining the superannuation age of 60 years.

¶34

Writ petitions are allowed and disposed of with the above direction.

¶35

JUDGE

¶36

Comparing Assistant

Prasadu P v. the State of Ap and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prasadu P v. the State of Ap and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Minjom Bagra Vs the State of Ap and 3 Ors.

The State of Ap Vs Ganesh Mech

M/s Y.B Enterprises Vs the State of Ap and 2 Ors.

Tapa Maying and 11 Ors. Vs the State of Ap and 33 Ors.

The Arunachal Pradesh State Social Welfare Board Vs Sadhu Charan Das and Anr.

SadhuCharan Das Vs The State of Ap and 5 Others