Disposed

The South Central Railway Employees Co-Op Credit Society Ltd. v. Commissioner of Labour, Hyderabad and 2 Others

Telangana HC2 Sept 2024WP/22710/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A cooperative credit society challenged appellate orders upholding that its retired employees' age of retirement was 60 years as per Railway Rules under paragraph 17 of its Service Conditions, not 58. The High Court applied its earlier order in W.P.No.8415 of 2003, held the employees were entitled to continue until 60, set aside retirement at 58, and directed payment for the denied two years of se

What did the court decide?

Writ petitions disposed of in line with W.P.No.8415 of 2003; retirement of respondent No.3 at 58 set aside; Society directed to pay salary etc. for two years of denied service; no costs.

The South Central Railway Employees Co-Op Credit… — Cooperative Societies | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³³⁰⁰¹

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

MONDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NOs: 22709 22710 22711 22712 & 22713 0F 2014

¶7

W.P.N0.22709 OF 2014

¶8

Between:

¶9

The South Central Railway Employees Cooperative Credit Society Ltd ., (Functioning under deemed Registration under the provisions of Multi State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002, vide Regd. No. 1548) Sahakara Bhavan, Himmatnagar, Secunderabad, Rep. by its Secretary

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 The .Second Appellate- Authority, under Section z1B of the A.p. Shops and Establishments Act 1988 and Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Circle-|, Anjaiah Bhavan R.T.C. Cross Road, Hyderabad.

¶13

2 The . First Appellate Authority, under section 48 of lhe A.p. Shops and Establishments Act 1988 and Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Circle-ll, Anjaiah Bhavan R.T.C. Cross Road, Hyderabad.

¶14

3 Sri.M.Ramachander Rao, S/o.M.Sailoo, Occ Retired as Office Superintendent, South Central Railway Employees Co-operative Credit Society. ltd,, Rl/o.H.No 11-2-268, Mylarg-adda, Seethaphalmandi, Secunderabad.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to (i) issue an appropriate Writ order or direction particularly one in the nature of certiorari by calling for records pertaining ,to the common orders dt.26.06.2014 passed in S.A. Nos.3,4,5,6,7 andS of 2O13 on the file of the Second Appellate Authority under Sec.48 of the A.P. Shops and Establishments Act 19BB and A.P. Shops and Establishments Rules 1990 and Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Circle-|, Hyderabad confirming the common orders dated 01.06.20i 3

I I

,ii li

passed in S.E. Case^{Nos.2,3,4,5,6and 7 of 2012on the file of the Authority} AppointedunderSection48oftheA.P.shopsandEstablishmentsActl9BBcum Assistant Commissioner^{of Labour, Circle-ll' Hyderabad(ii) and quash the same} bydeclaringthesameasarbitrary,illegal,irregular'UnconStitutionalandviolative of the law^{laid down and resiudicata in view of award of the lndustrial Tribunal-l} cum Labour^{Court dated02.11'2OOOpassed in lD No 40 of 99 and issue a} consequential^{direction to the effect that the RespondentNo-3do not come within} theprovisionslaiddownunderA.P.ShopsandEstablishmentsActandruleslaid down there^{undersince he comeswithin the exemption as per 73(1)(a) of the A'P'} Establishments^{Act sincethe duties involvedare supervisoryln} Shops and nature.

¶21

l.A. NO:1 O F^{2014{WPMP. NO:28477 0F 2014)}

¶22

PetitionunderSectionl5lcPcprayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin the affidavit^{filed in supportof the petition' the High Court may be pleasedto stay} all further^{proceedings includingthe disbursementof the amountdeposited in} pursuance to the orders^{dated26'06 2014 passed in SecondAppeal No 3 of} 2013 as^{per the commonordersdated26'06 2014 passed in S A No's 3'4'5'6'7} &Bof20.l3onthefileoftheSecondAppellateAuthorityunderSec.48oftheA.P. ShopsandEstablishmentsAct-lgssandA.P.shopsandEstablishmentsRules lgg0andDeputyCommissionerofLabour'Circle-l,Hyderabadconfirmingthe common orders^{dated0'1 .06.20'13 passed in S E Case No's 2'3'4'5'6 &7 of 2012} onthefileoftheAuthorityAppointedundersection43oftheA'P'Shopsand EstablishmentsActlgBBcumAssistantCommissionerofLabour,Circle.ll' Hyderabad^{peMingdisposal of the aboveWrit Petition'}

¶23

Gounsel for^{the Petitioner : SRI K'RAMANUJA CHARY}

¶24

Counsel for^{the RespondentsNo;1&2: GP FoR LABoUR} Counsel for the^{RespondentNo.3: SRI K'NIRMAL KUMAR PRASAD}

¶25

W.P.No .22710 0F²⁰¹⁴

¶26

Between:

¶27

The south central Railway^{Employeescooperative credit societyLtd., (Functioning} ,i1d"i-O!"r"4- n"glitruiion^{under tne} irwisions^{of Multi State} .Co-operative Soii"ti". A"i, 2O0L,^{vide Regd. No. 1548) Sahakara Bhavan,Himmatnagar,} Secunderabad, Rep.^{by its Secretary}

¶28

...PETITIONER

¶29

AND

¶30

1 The Second Appellate^{Authority, under Section 4B of the A P' Shops and} isiru-iiir,ments-hit rgas^{and'beputycommissioner of Labour,circle-1,} Anjaiah Bhavan^{R.T.C.Cross Road, Hyderabad.}

¶31

2 The First Appellate^{Authority, under section 48 of the, A'P' Shops} .and Estaffiifrineiiti-Ait^{tg8eand Assistant Commissionerof Labour, Circle-ll'} Anjaiah Bhavan^{R.T.C. Cross Road, Hyderabad.}

¶32

3 Sri.P.Gooala Krishna,, S/o.^{P.Kanthachari,Aged 57 years, Occ Retired as} C'tiiLi O-tfi* Srp"rintendent,^{South Centra! Railway Elnployees_Co-operative} ciiilt sJittv t]d.,^{Ryo.H.No B-124,New Sai Nagar, Road No 3, Near Uppal} Bus Depot, Uppal,^{Ranga ReddyDistrict-}

¶33

...RESPONDENTS

¶34

Petition under Article^{226 o',f the constitution of lndiapraying that in the} circumstances stated^{in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased} to (l) issue an appropriate^{wnt order or direction particularlyone in the natureof} certiorary by calling^{for records pertaining to the common orders dated 26.06.2014} passed in SA Nos. 3,4,5,6,7and8^{of 2013 on the file of the SecondAppellate} Authority under sec.^{48 of the A.P. Shopsand EstablishmentsAct 1988 and A.P.} shops and^{EstablishmentsRules 1990 and Deputy commissioner of Labour,} circle-|, Hyderabad^{confirmingthe common ordersdated 01.06.2013 passedin} S.E. Case Nos. 2,3,4,5,6^{and 7 of 2o12 on the file of the Authority Appointed under} Section48oftheA.P.ShopsandEstablishmentsActl9BBcumAssistant Commissioner of^{Ldbour, Circle-{1, Hyderabad(ii) and quash the same by dec-faring} the same as aibitrary,^{illegal, irregular, unconstitutional and violative of the law laid} down and resjudicata^{in view of award of the lndustrial Tribunal-l cum Labour court} dated 02.11.2000^{passedin lD No.40 of 99 and issue a consequential directionto} the effect that the^{Respondent No. 3 do not come withinthe provisionslaiddown} under A.P. Shops^{and Establishments Act and rules laid down there under since he} comeswithintheexemptionasperT3(1)(a)oftheA.P.ShopsandEstablishments Act since the duties^{involved are supervisoryin nature'}

¶35

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2014(WPMP. NO: 28478 OF 2014)

¶36

Petrtion under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the circumstances statedⁱⁿ the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Court^{may be pleasedto stay} all further^proceedings including the disbursement of the amount^{deposited in} pursuance to the orders dated 26.06.2014 passed in Second Appeal No. 4 of 2013 as per the common orders dated 26.06.2014^passed in^{SA Nos. 3,4,5,6,7&8of} 2013 on the file of the Second Appellate Authority under^{Sec. 48 of the A.P.Shops} and.Establishments Act 1988 and A.P. Shops and Establishments Rules^'1990 and Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Circle-|, Hyderabad confirming the common orders dated 01.06.2013^passed in S.E. Case Nos. 2,3,4,5,6^{&7 of 2012on the file} of the Authority Appointed under section 48 of the A.P. Shops and^{Establishments} Act 1988 cum Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Circle-ll, Hyderabad^pending disposal of the above Writ Petition.

¶37

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI K.RAMANUJA CHARY

¶38

Counsel for the Respondents No.1&2 : GP FOR LABOUR

¶39

Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : SRI K.NIRMAL KUMAR PRASAD

¶40

W.P.No.22711 OF 2014

¶41

Between:

¶42

The South Central Railway Employees Cooperative Credit Society Ltd.,^(Functioning under deemed Registration under the^provisions of Multi State Co-operative Societies Acl, 2002, vide Regd. No. 1548) Sahakara Bhavan, Himmatnagar, Secunderabad, Rep by its Secretary

¶43

...PETITIONER

¶44

AND

¶45

1 The Second Appellate Authority, under Section 48 of the A.P. Shops and Establishments Act 1 9BB and Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Circle-|, Anjaiah Bhavan R.T.C. Cross Road, Hyderabad.

¶46

2 The First Appellate Authority, under section 48 of the A.P. Shops and Establishments Act 1988 and Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Circle-ll, Anjaiah Bhavan R.T.C. Cross Road, Hyderabad.

¶47

3 Sri. B.Rama Narasaiah S/o. Late Sri.B.Ramaiah, Occ Retired as Chief Office Superintendent, South Central Railway Employees Co-operative Credit Society Ltd., R7o.H.No 1-9-25217 lB, Ramnagar, Hyderabad-20.

¶48

..RESPONDENTS

¶49

Petition under Article^{226 of lhe constitution of lndiaprayingthat in the} circumstances stated^{in the affidavit filed therewith,the High Court may be pleased} to(i) issue an appropriate^{writ order or difectionparticularlyone in the natureof} certiorari by calling^{for records pertainingto the commonordersdt.26.06.2014} passed in S.A. Nos.3,4,5,6,7 and 8^{of 2013 on the file of the Second Appellate} Authority under Sec.48^{of the A.P.Shopsand EstablishmentsAct'1988and A-P.} shops and Establishments^{Rules 1990 and Deputy Commissioner of Labour,} circle-I, Hyderabad^{confirming the common orders dated01 .06.2013 passedin} S.E'CaseNos.2,3,4,5,6andTof2012onthefileoftheAuthorityAppointedunder section 48 of the^{A.P. Shopsand EstablishmentsAct 1988 cumAssistant} commissioner of Labour,^{circle-ll, Hyderabad (ii) and quash the same by declaring} the same as arbitrary,^{illegal, irregular, unconstitutional and violative of the law laid} down and res.iudicata^{in view of award of the lndustrial Tribunal-l cum LabourCourt} dated 02.11.2000^{passedin lD.No.40of 99 and issuea consequential directionto} the effect that the^{Respondent No.3 do not come within the provisions laid down} under A.P. Shops^{and EstablishmentsAct and rules laid down there under since he} comes within the exemption^{as per 73(1)(a) of the A.P. Shops and Establishments} Act since the duties^{involved are supervisory in nature'}

¶50

l.A. NO:¹ O^{F 2014(WPMP. NO: 28479 0F 20141}

¶51

Petition under Section^{151 CPC praying that in the circumstances statedin} the affidavit^{filed in supportof the petitlon,the High courtmay be pleasedto stay} all further^{proceedings includingthe disbursemeintof the amount depositedin} pursuance to the orders dated^{26.06.2014 passedin Second Appeal No.6 of 2013} asperthecommonordersdated26.06.2014passedinSA-No's3'4'5'6'7&8of 2013 on the file of the^{secondAppellate Authority under sec.48 of the A.P.Shops} and Establishments^{Act 1988 and A.P. Shops and Establishments Rules1990 and} Deputy commisiioner^{of Labour, circle-l,Hyderabad confirmingthe common} orders dated^{01 .06.201 3 passedin S.E. Case No's.2,3,4,5,6 & 7 of 2012on the file} of the Authority Appointed^{under section 48 of the A.P. Shops and Establishments} Act^.1988 cum Assistant^{commissionerof Labour,circle-ll, Hyderabad pending} disposal of the above^{writ petition.}

¶52

Counsel for the Petitioner^{: SRI K.RAMANUJA CHARY}

¶53

Counsel for the Respondents No.1&2 : GP FOR LABOUR

¶54

Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : SRI K.NIRMAL^KUMARPRA'SAD

¶55

W.P.No.22712OF 2014

¶56

Between:

¶57

The South Central Railway Employees Cooperative Credit Society Ltd.,^(Functioning under deemed Registration under the^provisions of^{Multi State Co-operative} Societies Acl, 2002, vide Regd. No. 1548) Sahakara^{Bhavan,Himmatnagar,} Secunderabad, Rep. by its Secretary

¶58

...PETITIONER

¶59

AND

¶60

1 The Second Appellate Authority, under Section 48 of the A P. Shops and Establishments Act 1988 and Deputy Commissioner of Labour,^Circle-|, Anjaiah Bhavan R.T.C. Cross Road, Hyderabad.

¶61

2 The First Appellate Authority, under section 48 of the A.P. Shops and Establishments Act 1988 and Assistant Commissioner of Labour,^Circle-ll, Anlaiah Bhavan R.T.C. Cross Road, Hyderabad.

¶62

2 Sri, Y.Venkat Reddy,, S/o. Y.Koti Reddy, Aged 57^years, Occ Retired^as Office Superintendent, South Central Railway Employees Co-operative Credit Society Ltd , R/o 42-40911, Gayatrinagar, Moulali, Hyderabad.

¶63

...RESPONDENTS

¶64

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be^pleased to (i) issue an appropriate Writ order or direction^particularly one in the nature of certiorari by calling for records^pertaining to the common orders dt.26.06.2014 passed in S.A. Nos 3,4.5,6,7 and8 of 2013 on ihe file of the Second Appellate Authority under Sec.48 of the A.P. Shops and Establishments^{Act 1988 and A.P.} Shops and Establishments Rules 1990 and Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Circle-|, Hyderabad confirming the common orders dated 01.06.2013^passedin S.E. Case Nos.2,3,4,5,6 and 7 of 2012 on the file of the Authority Appornted under section 48 of the A. P. Shops and Establishments Act¹ 988^{cum Assistant} Commissioner of Labour, Circle-ll, Hyderabad (ii) and^quash the same by declaring the same as arbitrary, illegal, irregular, unconstitutional and violative of the law laid down and resjudicata in view of award of the lndustrial Tribunal-l cum Labour Court dated 02.1 1.2000 passed in lD. No. 40 of 99 and issue a consequential direction to the effect that the Respondent No.3 do not come within the provisions laid down

¶65

under A.P. Shops and^{Establishments Act and rules laid down there under since he} comes within the^{exemptionas per 73(1} )(a)^{pf (he A.P. Shops and Eslablisltffisi} Act since the duties^{involved are supervisory in natuii'}

¶66

l.A. NO: 1OF 2014(WPMP.^{NO:28480 oF 2014)}

¶67

Petition under Section^{151 cPC praying thatin the circumstancesstatedr in} the affidavit fited^{in support of the petition,the High Court may be pleasedto stly} all further^{proceedingsincluding the disbursement of the amountdeposited, in} pursuance to the orders dated^{26.06.2014passed in Second Appeal No 7 of ZO33} asperthecommonordersdated26.06.2014passedinSANo's3'4'5'6'7&8'oJ 2013 onthe file of^{the Second Appellate Authority under sec.48 of the A.P.Shops} and Establishments^{Act 1988 and A.P. Shops and Establishments Rules1990 and} Deputy Commissioner^{of Labour, Circle-|, Hyderabadconfirming the common} orders dated 01.06.2013^{passed in S-E. Case No's.2,3,4,5,6 & 7 oI 2012 on the file} oftheAuthorityAppointedundersection48oftheA.P.ShopsandEstablishments Act 19BB cum^{Assistant commissionerof Labour,0!rde-11, Hyderabad pending} disposal of the above^{writ Petition and pass such other further order or ordersas} may deem fit and^{properin the circumstancesof the case'}

¶68

Counsel for the^{Petitioner : SRI K.RAMANUJA CHARY}

¶69

Counsel for the^{RespondentsNo.1&2: GP FOR LABOUR}

¶70

Counsel for the^{RespondentNo.3 : SRI K.NIRMAL KUMAR PRASAD}

¶71

W.P.No.22713OF²⁰¹⁴

¶72

Between:

¶73

TheSouthCentralRailwayEmployeesCo-operative,Cred]t..S.ociety-Ltd., iii-6.ti*ing^{underdeemedHegistrhtidn under thb orovisionsof Multi StateCo-} ooerative societies nct,'-zb'o'i,-'vi;;^{R"sa No.' 1548)Sahakara Bhavan,} Himmatnagar, Secunderabad,^{Rep.' by its Secretary}

¶74

...PETITIONER

¶75

AND

¶76

1 The Second Apoellate Authority,^{under Section48 of the A'P' Shopsand} i;irilit"ti#;iShiilseS^{ino Deputvcommissioner of Labour' cirde-l'} Anjaiah Bhavan^{R.T.C. Cross Road, Hyderabad'}

¶77

, i I I

¶78

::;i : "' 'r{-: . -r;.

¶79

The First Appellate^{Authority, under section 48 of.the A P Shopsdnd} --tt;.Establishmbhts Act^{1988 arid Assistant Commissionerof Labour,Circleitl;} r'.: fiE'atiBil";n R.r c.^{Cross Road, Hyderabad.} .:.

¶80

Sri. G.M. Ramesh,,^{S/o. Late G.H. MallaiahOcc RetiredAsst. Secretarfi .^} South Central Raiiway^{Employees Co-operative Credit SocietyLtd.'H,Nc13-1-} 2'1 5, Somasundram Street,^{Secunderabad.}

¶81

...RESPONDENTS .* !i

¶82

Petition under Article²²⁶ of^{the constitution of lndiapraying thatlrinthe} circumstances statedⁱⁿ the^{affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pTeased} to(i) lssue an approp.riate^{Writ order or directionparticularlyone in the natureof} certiorari by calling for records^{pertaining to the commonordersdt.26.06.2014} passed in S.A. Nos.3,4,5,6,7 and8 of 2013^{on the file of the SecondAppellate} Authority under sec.4B of the^{A.P, ShopsandEstablishmentsAct 1988and A.P.} shops and Establishments^{Rules 1990 and Deputy commissionerof Labour,} circle-|, Hyderabad^{confirmingthe common orders dated 01.06.2013 passedin} S.E. Case Nos.2,3,4,5,6 and^{7 of 2012on the file of the Authority Appointed under} section 48 of the A.P.^{Shops and EstablishmentsAct '1988 cumAssistant} commissioner of Labour.^{circle-ll,Hyderabad (ii) and quash the sameby declaring} the same as arbitrary,^{illegal, irregular,uncon stitutiona I and violative of the law laid} down and resjudicata^{in view of awardof the lndustrial Tribunal-l cumLabourCourt} dated 02.11.2000^{passedrn lD. No. 40 of 99 and issue a consequential directionto} the effect that the^{Respondent No.3 do not come within the provisions laid down} under A.P. Shops and Establishments^{Act and rules laid down there under since he} comes within the exemption^{as per 73(1)(a) of the A.P. Shops and Establishments} Act since the duties involved^{are supervisoryin nature}

¶83

l.A. NO: 1OF 2014^{(WPMP. NO: 28481 OF 20 141}

¶84

Petition under Section 151 CPC^{praying that in the circumstancesstated in} the affidavit filed in support^{of the petition,the Highcourtmay be pleased stayall} further^proceedings including the^{disbursement of the amount deposited in} pursuance to the orders dated 26.06.2014^passed in Second Appeal^No. I^{o^f2013} as per the common orders dated 26.06.2014^{passed in S.A.No's.3,4,5,6,7&8 of} 2013 on the file of the Second Appellate Authority under^{Sec.48 of the A.P; Shops} and Establishments Act^'1 9BB and A.P. Shops and Establishments^{Rules1990 and} Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Circle-1, Hyderabad^{confirmingthe cpmmon}

¶85

ordersdatedo1.06.2013passedinS.E.CaseNo.s.2,3,4,5,6&7of2012onthefile of the Authority^{Appointed under Section48 of the A P' Shops and Establishments} Act 1988 cum^{Assistant commissionerof Labour,circle-ll, Hyderabad pending} disposal of the^{aboveWrit Petition'}

¶86

¶87

Counsel for^{the Petitioner : SRI K'RAMANUJA CHARY} Counsel for^{the Respondents No'1&2 : GP FORLABOUR} Counsel for the^{RespondentNo.3: SRI K'NIRMAL KUMARPRASAD} The Court made^{the following: COMMONORDEB} i , .k

¶88

¶89

HON'BLE SRI JUSTTCE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION N os.22709. 227 lO. 22711.22712 and22713 of2Ol4

¶90

COMMON ORDER:

¶91

The grievance, as also the relief sought, in all these writ petitions being identical, they are analogously heard and are being disposed of by this Common Order. For the sake of discussion, the facts in W.P.No.22709 of 2014 are being referred to.

¶92

The case, in a nutshell, is that certain employees of the South Central Railway Employees' Co-operative Credit Socief Ltd., Secunderabad, (for short 'the Society') were retired from service on attaining the age of 58 years. Questioning their retirement on the ground that the Service Condition No.l7 of the Society stipulates the Age of Retirement of the employees to be in accordance with the Railway Rules, as amended from time to time, the retirees approached the 2n'r respondent-First Appellate Authority by filing S.E.Nos.2, 3,4,5,6,and7 of 2012. The2ndrespondent, by Common Order dated 02.11.2000, allowed the Petitions by upholding the contention of the retirees that their Age of Retirement should be as per Railway Rules, which is 60, as contemplated under the Service Conditions/bye laws of the Society, Aggrieved by the same, the

¶93

¶94

wp22709, 2271O, 227 | l, 22712,²²⁷¹³ _20^{| 4} NBK, J

¶95

Cooperative Credit Society filed Appeal^{before the I't respondent-} Second Appellate Authority^vide S.A.Nos.3,4,5,^{6,7 and 8 of 20 13.} The Appeals came to be dismissed by Common^{Order dated} 26.06.2014, thereby affirming the Order^{dated02.1l-2000 passed by} the 2nd respondent-First Appellate Authority-

¶96

Questioning^{the dismissalof the Appeals,the Society is before} this Court with these Writ Petitions.

¶97

Leamed counsel for the^{petitioner-Society contends that} Service Condition mentioned at^{para No. 17 relating to the Age of} Retirement was amended by the^{appropriateAuthorityas per Multi-} State Co-operative Societies Act,^{2O02, thereby the retirementage} came to be modified to 58 and therefore^{the judgment of the} respondent Nos. I and 2-Appellate^{Authoritiesthat employees} retirement age is 60 is an erroneous^judgment.

¶98

Leamed counsel for the^{petitioner-Societyfurther contends} that without explicit adoption of the^{RailwayRules by the} Management of the Society, the Railway^{Rules do not automatically} apply to the Society employees, and therefore^{the respondents-}

¶99

-"-

¶100

\p 22709,2271O,227 I I,22712.22713 2014 NBK, J

¶101

¶102

Appellate Authorities erred in^passing the^{impugned order. It is also} contended that the Society is an independent body^{registered under} the Societies Act and is not a part of the Railway Department. It^is contended that respondent No.3 was retired from service^on attaining the age of 58 years, and it is elToneous to^construe it as a "termination from service", and the^{respondentsNo.} I^{and 2-} Authorities erred in holding that respondent No.3 was^terminated from service. It is also contended that the respondents-Appellate Authorities erred in holding that the Society has not complied with the provisions laid down under Section 48(3) of^the Andhra^Pradesh Shops and Establishment Act. It is contended that the^Societyhas deposited/settled full amount as per Service Rules of the Society r/w DRM pattern which is followed by the Society. Leamed^counsel therefore assails the impugned orders as illegal and^{unsustainable.}

¶103

Heard leamed counsel for respondent No.3-retiree.

¶104

Counter affidavit is filed by respondent No.3 opposing^the contention raised in the writ petition. The sum and substance of the counter affidavit, insofar as it touches the material contentions of the

¶105

¶106

w_22709,^{22710, 227 t I} ,^{227 t2, 22'7 t3} '2O14 NBK, J

¶107

writ affidavits, is that paragraph No. l7 of the Society Service Rules, which stipulates the retirement age of 60 years remained unamended and even witnesses RW.l and RW.2 on behalf of the writ petitioner/Sociefy deposed to that effect before the 2"d respondentFirst Appellate Authority.

¶108

It is further stated that the Board of Management passed a Resolution dated 27/28.02.2012 seeking amendment to paragraph No. 17 of the Service Rules and sought approval through the Resolution to raise the retirement age to 60 years and submitted the same to the Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperation, New Delhi, dated 12.03.2012.

¶109

It is stated in the counter that there is no amendment rolling back the age of retirement from 60 to 58 years. Therefore, it is contended that paragraph No. 17 has never been amended to reduce the age ofretirement from 60 years to 58 years. It is also contended that paragraph No. l7 of Service Conditions on the Age of Retirement explicitly states that "Relirement age is as per Railway Rules as amended from time lo lime". Therefore, it is contended

¶110

¶111

wp 22709, 22't tO, 227 I I, 22-1 tZ, 227 t 3 lot 4 NBK, J

¶112

L I

¶113

that the age of rerirement as notified under the Railway Rules, as amended from time to time, mutatis mutandis applies to the Society employees, and there is no separate retirement age specified for Society employees.

¶114

9- Leamed counsel for respondent No.3 further submits that this matter is squarely covered by the order dated, 19.04.2017 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.84l5 of 2003.

¶115

Having considered the respective contentions and perusing the material on record, it may be noted that the Age of Retirement specified under the Service Conditions of Society, at paragraph No. l7 reads as under:

¶116

"17.^Age of Retirement:

¶117

Retirement age is as per Railway Rules as amended from time to time"

¶118

I I . It is explicit fiom the above extracted Service Rule that the

¶119

retirement age of Sociefy employees is as per Railway Rules, as

¶120

amended from time to time. Therefore, it is amply clear that lbere is

¶121

-t'

¶122

¶123

w_22709,^{227 t0, 2271I , 227 12,22713} _2014 NBK, J

¶124

no separate retirement age for Society^{employees inconsistentor}

¶125

different from that of railway employees.

¶126

At this^juncture, it may be^{notedthat in similarcircumstances} in WP No.84l5 of 2003, this Court^{directedas follows:}

¶127

"The 2"d respondent issued the impugned^memo retiring the petitioner w.eJ, 31.05.2003^{on the ground} that the petitioner was completing^{58 years. The} presumption is the memo is issued^{having regard to the} applicable service condition.^{Therefore, the burden is} on 2d respondent to satisfactorily^{establish that the} memo impugned in the writ^petition is^{issued in} consonance with the extant service conditions.^{In the} case on hand, the 2nd respondent failed^{to discharge} the burden, for the letter on which^the 2d^respondent relies upon cannot be treated as an^{amendmenteither} to byelaw or service condition^{altering the age of} superannuation. Further, the age of^{superannuationis} 60 years in Railways. By apptying^{the Rule viz-,} retirement age is as per Railway Rules as^amended from^{time to time, I am satisfied the impugned memo is} illegal and unconstitutional. Hence,^memorandumto the extent retiring the petitioner from^{servicew-e.f.,} 31.05.2003 is set aside and this Court further^{holds that} the petitioner is entitled to be continued^{up to 60 years.} Since the petitioner had already retired from^{service, it} is held that the 2"d respondent Pays salary etc.,^to petitioner for denying two years of service as^per sxylce condition"

¶128

¶129

¶130

wp 22709, 227 10, 227 t t, 227 1 2, 22'7 t 3 2Ot4 NBK, J

¶131

A perusal of W.P.No.8415 of 2003 would show that it is directly on the issue in contest in the present writ petition and this Court is of the view that the rationale in order passed Wp No.g4 l5 of2003 is applicable to the case at hand.

¶132

In that view of the matter, these Writ petitions are disposed of in the light of the order passed by this Court in W.p.No.g4l5 of 2003. Consequently, the Memorandum to the extent of retiring respondent No.3 from service at 58 years is set aside and this Court further holds that respondent No.3 is entitled to continue until he is 60 years. However, admiuedly, as respondent No.3 had already retired from service, the petitioner-SocietSr shall pay salary etc., to respondent No.3 for denying two years of service as per paragraph l7 of the Service Conditions. No Costs. Miscellaneous applications,

¶133

pending ifany, shall stand closed.

¶134

/ITRUE^COPY// ^??1,,1,-lT',s,3'.*l SECT,iON^OFFICER

¶135