Be that as it may, having gone through the rival submission of the parties, this Court is of the considered view that the case of the petitioner needs consideration. Admittedly, the petitioner ought to have retire on the date of his superannuation on completion of 60 years of age. An employee can be superannuated only on attaining age of superannuation and cannot be retired on the ground of completion of 42 years of service, particularly in absence of any specific stipulation in the service rules that as and when employee complete 40/42 years of service, he has to superannuate. The case in hand, there is no specific stipulation that employee has to superannuate after completion of 40/42 years of service and as such, in absence of any specific stipulation Service Rules comes into play and as per the Service Rules, an employee has to superannuate as per the date of birth mention in service excerpts as well as matriculation certificate. As per the date of birth mentioned in service records/matriculation certificate, the petitioner is to superannuate on 31.07.2017 on attaining the age of 60 years and as such, no imaginary date can be fixed by the employer for making him to superannuate on 30.04.2017 and as such, impugned order is quashed and set aside regarding his superannuation on 30.04.2017. However, as the petitioner has already retired two years ago, he is
