B.P. SINGH AND ORSversusDIRECTOR GENERAL, ORDNANCE FACTORY AND ORS

                            B.P. SINGH AND ORS.
                                          v.
    DIRECTOR GENERAL, ORDNANCE FACTORY AND ORS.

                                   JULY 9, 1991
B
                [KULDIP SINGH AND N.M. KASLIWAL JJ.)

         Civil Service-Teachers employed in the schools & controlled by
    Defence Department-Age of retirement whether 58 or 60 years.

        In the petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution oflndia,
C the petitioners teachers, employed in the schools run by the respon-
  dents, controlled by till> Defence Department of the Government of
  India, contended that the action of the respondents in retiring them at
  the age of 58 years, whereas retaining similarly situated teachers work-
  ing in other departments upto the age of 60 years was discriminatory
D and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.

          The respondents filed the Office Memorandum dated 10.3.1989
    issued by the Ministry of Personnel, wherein it was stated that the age of
    retirement of the teachers working in all the Departments and Organi-
    sations was uniformly fixed at 58 years.
E
            Dismissing the petition, this Court,

          HELD: With effect from April 1, 1989 the age of superannua-
    tion of all teachers working in Central Government Departments and
    Organisations including Union Territories has been uniformly fixed at
    58 years. [838F]
F
            ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ petition (C} No. 118 of
    1987.

            Under Article 32 of the Constitution oflndia.
G
         O.P. Sharma, K.R. Gupta, Vivek Sharma, R.C. Gubrele and
    Ms. Nanita Sharma for the Petitioners.

         M. Chander Sekhran, Additional Solicitor General-I, P.
    Parmeshwaran, S.N. Terdal, Ms. Kitty Kumaramangalam, Ms. A.
H   Subhashini and Ms. Sangeeta Aggarwal for the Respondents.


                                         836
                 B.P. SINGH v. DIRECTOR GENERAL [SINGH, l.]              837

          The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
                                                                                A
          KULDIP SINGH, J. B.P. Singh and nine other teachers emp-
     loyed in the schools run by the Ordnance Factories at Kanpur and
     Muradnagar, have filed this petition under Article 32 of the Constitu_-
     tion of India challenging their retirement from service on attaining the
     age of 58 years. They claim that they are entitled to have the age of      B
     superannuation fixed at 60 years instead of 58 years.

           Mr. O.P. Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners,
     has contended that the age of superannuation of the teachers working
     in the schools controlled by various departments of Government of
     India other than the Defence Department has been enhanced to 60
     years and according to him there is no justification to single-out the
     teachers working in the schools run by the Ordnance Factories under
     the control of the Defence Department of Government of India

           Mr. Sharma has relied upon a Memorandum issued by the
     Government of India, Ministry of Education dated September 6, 1983
.    by which the age of retirement of Delhi School Teachers and teachers
     in other Union Territories was raised to 60 years. He has also relied on
                                                                                D


     a Memorandum .dated March 9, 1984 issued by the Railway Board
     wherein the age of superannuation of t~e teachers_ w<:>_rking In the
     Railway schools was also enhanced to 60 years.
                                                                              E
            Mr. Sharma has thus argued that the action of the respondents in
     retiring the petitioners at the age of 58 years whereas retaining simi-
     larly situated teachers working in other departments of Government of
     India upto the age of 60 years, is discriminatory and as such violative
     of Artic:_les 14 and 16 of th"- Constitution of India. Prima facie there
     seems to be force in the argument but in view of the Office F
     Memorandum dated March 10, 1989 issued by the Government of
     India, Ministry of Personnel, New Delhi, it is not necessary to examine
      the sa.;,e. Shri N. Siva Subramaniam, Joint Secretary, Ministry of
      Defence has, alongwith an additional affidavit dated March 16, 1989
    · filed the said Memorandum in this court which is reproduced here-
      under:                                                              G

                      "As the Ministry of Human Resource Development
                etc. are aware, the age of superannuation for all Central
                Government employees, save with the exception of a few
                categories, has been fixed at 58 years and they are to retire
                on the last day of the month in which they attain that age.     H
     838                     SUPREME COURT REPORTS              [1991] 2 S.C.R.

                   However, there is no uniformity in the age of superannua-
A
                   tion of teachers in various schools/institutions in the Cent-
                   ral Government.

                   2. In the light of the observations of the Fourth Central
                   Pay Commission regarding the age of retirement of Central
B                  Government employees, the Government has reviewed the
                   entire question de novo and it has now been decided that
                   the age of retirement on superannuation of all teachers
                   working in Central Government Departments and Organi-
                   sations including Union Territories may be uniformly fixed
                   at 58 years, whether they are in the Ministry of Education,
                   Ministry of Railways, Ministry of Defence or any other
c                  Ministry/Department or in Delhi Administration. Conse-
                   quently, in schools/institutions where the age of retirement
                   on superannuation for teachers is presently fixed at 58
                   years, no change is required to be made and the incum-
                   bents as well as future recruits shall retire on attaining the
D                  age of 58 years. However, in regard to schools/institutions
                   where the age of retirement on superannuation for teachers
                   is presently fixed at 60 years/the same shall be lowered to
                   58 years w.e.f. 1st April, 1989 with the _exception that the
                   teachers who had joined such schools/institutions P.rior to
                   this date, shall continue to enjoy the existing benefit and
E                  superannuate on attaining the age of 60 years. Further, in
                   respect of such schools/institutions, no new appointment,
                   either on regular or ad hoc basis, shall be made between
                   the date of this Office Memorandum and 1.4.1989."

          It is thus obvious that with effect from April 1, 1989 the age of
F    superannuation of all teachers working in Central Governr;ient
     Departments and Organisations including Union Territories has been
     uniformly fixed at 58 years. The only argument advanced by Mr.
     Sharma has, thus, been completely answered by the above quoted
     Office Memorandum.

.G            The Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to
     costs.

     V.P.R.                                                  Petition dismissed.