11672 of 1989 connected with writ petition Nos. The controversy involved in this case is covered by the decision given by this Court in Civil Misc. In pursuance of the order of this Court dated 15.9.97 the petitioner filed an affidavit stating that his date of the appointment is 9.4.53 i.e prior to the aforesaid cut off date i.e 27.4.53, therefore, he would retire on attaining the age of 60 years. By order dated 15th September, 1997 this Court directed the petitioner to file a supplementary affidavit indicating the exact date of entry in service as it is well settled by various judgments of this Court that those lekhpals who were appointed prior to 27.4.53 will retire at the age of 60 years and those who were appointed after the aforesaid cut off date will retire at the age of 58 years.Ĥ. However, it is made clear that the petitioner will not be entitled to continue in service after he attains the age of 60 years.”ģ. Until further orders of this Court the respondents are restrained from retiring the petitioner on his attaining the age of 58 years.
List this writ petition for admission after the expiry of the aforesaid date. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within two weeks thereafter. “Learned Standing counsel prays for and is granted three weeks' time of file a counter-affidavit. At the time of filing of the writ petition the following ad-interim order was passed on : He alleges that his date of birth as entered in the service record is 8th January, 1933. Thereafter, he was officiating on the post of Kanoongo in Tehsil, Thakurdwara, District Moradabad at the relevant time. The petitioner was initially appointed as lekhpal.
Rakesh Tiwari, J.:- Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.Ģ.
0 kommentar(er)
