S.K. Dwivedi vs Managing Director
2021 Latest Caselaw 5190 MP

                                                           1                                 WA-453-2021
                                The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                            WA-453-2021
                                          (S.K. DWIVEDI Vs MANAGING DIRECTOR AND OTHERS)

                      WA/00378/2021, WA/00386/2021, WA/00403/2021, WA/00404/2021, WA/00406/2021,
                      WA/00436/2021, WA/00437/2021, WA/00438/2021, WA/00439/2021, WA/00440/2021,
                      WA/00441/2021, WA/00442/2021, WA/00443/2021, WA/00444/2021, WA/00445/2021,
                      WA/00446/2021, WA/00447/2021, WA/00465/2021, WA/00466/2021, WA/00482/2021,
                             WA/00506/2021, WA/00507/2021, WA/00508/2021, WA/00546/2021
                      4
                      Jabalpur, Dated : 08-09-2021
                               Heard through Video Conferencing.
                               Shri Deepak Awasthy, Shri Vipin Yadav, Ms. Sneh Mishra, Shri

                      Deependra Kumar Mishra and Shri Adamya Bajpai, learned counsel for the
                      appellants in respective appeals.
                               Shri Shobhitaditya, learned counsel for the respondent/M.P.State Civil

Supplies Corporation Ltd.

In all these appeals, the judgment passed by the learned Single Bench dated 25/03/2021 is under challenge. The learned Single Judge has by the aforesaid judgment dismissed the writ petitions filed by the appellants. Appellants in their writ appeals prayed for a direction to the respondents to allow them to continue in service till they attain the age of 62 years in terms of

the decision of the Government which the respondent/Corporation adopted but the stand of the Corporation was that the decision to adopt the

Government policy was taken in 217th meeting of the Board of Directors, in Agenda Item No. 217/2019, enhancing the age of retirement of employees of the Corporation from 60 to 62 years on 29/03/2020 with effect from 31/03/2020. Therefore, all those who attained the age of 60 years prior to 31/03/2020 would be liable to retire on the basis of the old policy.

This Court while issuing notice in the appeals, has directed the respondent/Corporation to allow such of the appellants, who have not yet attained the age of 62 years to continue in service till they attain the age of 62 years.

The matters are ripe for hearing.

Signature Not SAN Verified Learned counsel for the appellants pray for adjournment to prepare and Digitally signed by MANJU CHOUKSEY Date: 2021.09.11 12:19:45 IST 2 WA-453-2021 finally argue the matter, but at the same time, they also contend that despite some of the employees having attained the age of 62 years and now not working with respondent, their retiral dues are not being paid.

Shri Shobhitaditya, learned counsel appearing for the respondent- Corporation submits that till the dispute about the age of superannuation in

respect of those attaining age of 60 years prior to 31/03/2020 is decided, the retiral dues cannot be quantified by taking 62 years as the age of retirement.

Having regard to the aforesaid submissions, the interim order passed by this Court is modified and clarified in the terms that such of the employees who on the strength of interim order passed by this Court, have attained the age of 62 years, may be paid their retiral dues by deeming them to have retired at the age of 60 years, subject to final outcome of the writ appeals.

Matters to come up for hearing on 07/10/2021. To be listed along with Writ Petition filed vide Provisional ID No.106313/2021.

                              (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)                           (VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA)
                               CHIEF JUSTICE                                        JUDGE


                      manju




Signature
 SAN      Not
Verified

Digitally signed by
MANJU CHOUKSEY
Date: 2021.09.11
12:19:45 IST