KASHMIRI LAL SHARMA versus HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD. & ANR.

Citation: [2025] 5 S.C.R. 446 · Decided: 02-04-2025 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: MANOJ MISRA, K.V. VISWANATHAN · Disposal: Case Partly allowed
cites 4 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2025] 5 S.C.R. 446 : 2025 INSC 472
Kashmiri Lal Sharma 
v. 
Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Ltd. & Anr.
(Civil Appeal No(s). 4761-4762 of 2025)
03 April 2025
[Manoj Misra and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Whether the benefit of extension of retirement age for the 
physically disabled category could be confined to persons with 
visual impairment as provided in the OM dated 29.03.2013 or it 
should be available to persons suffering from all such disabilities as 
are specified in the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, 
Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 and the Rights 
of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016; whether such extension 
could be withdrawn as was done by the OM dated 04.11.2019. If 
yes, then what would be its effect on the claim of the appellant.
Headnotes†
Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of 
Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 – Rights of Persons 
with Disabilities Act, 2016 – Whether the benefit of extension 
of retirement age for the physically disabled category could 
be confined to persons with visual impairment as provided in 
the OM dated 29.03.2013 or it should be available to persons 
suffering from all such disabilities as are specified in the 
Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection 
of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 and the Rights of 
Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016:
Held: The said issue stand settled by the decision of this Court 
in Bhupinder Singh case – The benefit of extension of retirement 
age as provided under the OM dated 29.03.2013 could not have 
been confined to visually impaired category – Rather, it should be 
available to persons suffering from all such benchmark disabilities 
as are specified in the 1995 Act and the 2016 Act. [Para 16]
Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of 
Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 – Rights of Persons with 
[2025] 5 S.C.R. 
447
Kashmiri Lal Sharma v.  
Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Ltd. & Anr.
Disabilities Act, 2016 – General Clauses Act – s.212 – Whether 
the benefit of the OM dated 29.03.2013 could be withdrawn 
as was done by the Office Memorandum dated 04.11.2019:
Held: The parties have not brought on record any document to 
canvass that the retirement age of persons suffering from specified 
physical disabilities was enhanced by amending the service rules 
or regulations or statutory provision and therefore, change in 
service conditions could not have been made by way of office 
memorandums or executive instructions – In these circumstances, 
applying the general principles, as enshrined in s.212 of the 
General Clauses Act, the power to issue would include the power 
to rescind, this Court is of the view that the OM dated 04.11.2019 
was well within the competence of the authority which issued the 
OM dated 29.03.2013 – Consequently, the OM dated 04.11.2019 
cannot be faulted for lack of competence – Otherwise also, an 
employee has no fundamental right as regards the age at which he 
would retire – Moreover, termination of service of an employee on 
account of reaching the age of superannuation in accordance with 
law or rules regulating the conditions of service does not amount 
to his removal from service within the meaning of Art. 311(2) of 
the Constitution of India – This Court is of the view that till the 
date the said OM dated 29.03.2013 was operative, the appellant 
was entitled to its benefit as, admittedly, he fell in the category of 
employee suffering from such disabilities as are specified in the 
1995 Act and the 2016 Act. [Paras 18, 21]
Case Law Cited
Bhupinder Singh v. State of Punjab and Others [1988] 3 SCR 
409 : 1988 (3) SCC 513 – relied on.
State of Punjab and Others v. Bhupinder Singh [2004] 3 SCR 
718 : (2004) 4 SCC 213; Union of India v. Devendra Kumar Pant 
[2009] 11 SCR 1 : (2009) 14 SCC 546; K. Nagaraj and Others v. 
State of Andhra Pradesh and Another [1985] 2 SCR 579 : (1985) 
1 SCC 523 – referred to.
The Principal Secretary Health and Family Welfare & Anr. v. 
Surender Kumar Vashisth, decided on 20.12.2022 in CWP No. 
7860 of 2021 by High Court of Himachal Pradesh; State of H.P. 
& Others v. Krishan Chand, decided on 05.11.2018 in CWP No. 
1577/2018 by High Court of Himachal Pradesh – referred to.
448
[2025] 5 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
List of Acts
Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights 
and Full Participation) Act, 199
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.