LexNAGALAND SENIOR GOVT. EMPLOYEES WELFARE ASSOCIATION & ORS. versus THE STATE OF NAGALAND & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c [2010] 7 S.C.R. 630 NAGALAND SENIOR GOVT. EMPLOYEES WELFARE ASSOCIATION & ORS. v. THE STATE OF NAGALAND & ORS. (Civil Appeal No. 4955 of 2010) JULY 6, 2010 [J.M. PANCHAL AND R.M. LODHA, JJ.] Service Law: Nagaland Retirement From Public Employment Act, 1991: s.3(as amended by Amendment Act, 2009) - Providing for retirement of a person on completing 35 years of service D from the date of joining or on attaining the age of 60 years, whichever is earlier- HELD: Is valid and does not suffer from the vice of arbitrariness/ irrationality nor is it violative of Articlf]s 14 and 16 of the Constitution - There is no absolute proposition in law nor any invariable rule in the service E jurisprudence that an employee can be made to retire from public employment on account of age alone - Fixation of maximum length of service as an alternative criterion for retirement from public service, by no stretch of imagination, can be held to be violative of any recognized norms of F employment planning - High Court has rightly upheld the amendment - Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 14 and 16. The Nagaland Retirement From Public Employment G Act, 1991 was amended by the Nagaland Retirement From Public Employment (Amendment) Act, 2007 (1st Amendment Act, 2007) increasing the age of superannuation from 57 to 60 years. This led to State- wide students unrest, and pursuant to the representation H 630 NAGALAND SR. GOVT. EMPLOYEES WELFARE 631 ASSN. v. STATE OF NAGALAND made by the Naga-Students Federation on the issue of A growing frustration amongst the youth of the State because of unemployment, the State Legislature, by the Nagaland Retirement From Public Employment (Second Amendment) Act, 2009 amended s. 3 of the Act prescribing, "a person in public employment shall hold B office for a term of 35 years froni the date of joining public employment or until he attains the age of 60 years, whichever is earlier." On July 20, 2009, the State Government issued an Office Memorandum asking all departments to submit the list of employees who would c have completed 35 yeas of service by October 31, 2009. The Nagaland Senior Government Employees Welfare Association filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging the 2009 Amendment and the O.M. The single Judge as also the Division Bench of the High Court 0 upheld the amendment. In the instant appeal filed by the Employees' Association, the question for consideration before the Court was: "whether the impugned provision that prescribes retiring the persons from public employment E in the State of Nagaland on completion of 35 years' service from the date of joining or until attaining the age of 60 years whichever is earlier, is arbitrary, irrational and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution." Dismissing the appeal, the Court F HELD: 1.1. Section 3 of the Nagaland Retirement From Public Employment Act, 1991 (as amended by the 2nd Amendment Act, 2009), which prescribes retiring the persons from public employment in the State on G completion of 35 years' service from the date of joining or until attaining the age of 60 years, whichever is earlier, does not suffer from the vice of arbitrariness or irrationality and is not violative of Articles 14 and 16 of H 632 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 7 S.C.R. A the Constitution of India. The provision is consistent with the decision in the case of Yeshwant Singh Kothari* and the ratio in that case is squarely applicable to the case In hand. The High Court has rightly upheld the B c amendment. [para 29, 40·41 and 48] [651-D·E; 666-G] *Yeshwant Singh Kothari v. State Bank of Indore & Ors. 1993 (1) SCR 208 = 1993 (2) Suppl. sec 592, relied on. K Nagaraj and Ors. v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Anr. 1985 ( 2 ) SCR 579 = 1985 ( 1 ) SCC 523, referred to. 1.2. It is true that 'superannuation' means discharge from service on account of age. Although the impugned provision does not use the expression 'superannuation' but broadly retirement is referred to as superannuation. 0 There is no absolute proposition in law nor any invariable rule in the service jurisprudence that an employee can be made to retire from public employment on account of age alone. What the Constitution guarantees for the citizens is equality of opportunity under the employment of the E Government and the prohibition of discrimination between its employees but there is no provisi
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.