Setting retirement age is a political decision, scope of limited judicial review: Andhra Pradesh HC

Read also

The High Court ruled that “GOMs.No.83 of 24.12.2021 increasing the retirement age from 58 to 60 for AP Model Schools staff, as prescribed in GOMs.No.147 of 30.06.2014, by necessary implication, is considered retroactive in its entry into force from 02.06.2014 being the date of GOMs.No.147, of 30.06.2014 affecting and would cover the petitioner’s case, since on 02.06.2014 the petitioner had not reached the retirement age of 58. The applicant is required to be entitled to the benefit of the increase in retirement age from 58 to 60 by applying GOM.No.83, dated 24.12.2021 and to continue to serve until the retirement age of 60. The Applicant is entitled to be immediately reinstated in service in the same post with all consequential and incidental service allowances with continuity of service.

In view of the above, the High Court granted the application.

Case title: P. Naga Jasmine vs. Andhra Pradesh State

Bench: Judge Ravi Nath Tilhari

Quote: WRITTEN APPLICATION No. 13554 of 2020

Get instant legal updates on mobile – Download the Law Trend app now

Recently, Andhra Pradesh HC has ruled that fixing the retirement age, increasing the retirement age and increasing from what date are all a policy decision and within the scope of policy. he application of judicial review under Section 226 of the Constitution of India is limited.

The bench of Judge Ravi Nath Tilhari considered that in the absence of statutory rules, governing the conditions of service, executive instructions and decisions taken administratively must operate and in accordance with these executive instructions/directions, the question of retirement age can be dealt with.

In this case, in the case of government employees, see GOMs.No.147 Department of Finance (HRMIV), dated 30.06.2014, the retirement age has been raised from 58 to 60 years.

With regard to the teaching and non-teaching staff of the AP model schools, the retirement age has also been raised from 58 to 60, so there is no justification for not keeping the applicant in the position of principal until until she reaches the age of 60 as an au pair for state employees in terms of retirement.

The question to be considered before the bench was as follows:

Is the petitioner entitled to an increase in the retirement age from 58 to 60 and to continue until the age of 60?

The High Court said there was no dispute over the Bill that, fixing the retirement age, raising the retirement age and raising it from what date, all fall within the realm of political decision and the scope of the judiciary. scrutiny under Section 226 of the Constitution of India in policy decisions is based on very limited grounds.

Join LAW TREND WhatsAPP group for legal news updates – Click to subscribe

Read also

The High Court ruled that “GOMs.No.83 of 24.12.2021 increasing the retirement age from 58 to 60 for AP Model Schools staff, as prescribed in GOMs.No.147 of 30.06.2014, by necessary implication, is considered retroactive in its entry into force from 02.06.2014 being the date of GOMs.No.147, of 30.06.2014 affecting and would cover the petitioner’s case, since on 02.06.2014 the petitioner had not reached the retirement age of 58. The applicant is required to be entitled to the benefit of the increase in retirement age from 58 to 60 by applying GOM.No.83, dated 24.12.2021 and to continue to serve until the retirement age of 60. The Applicant is entitled to be immediately reinstated in service in the same post with all consequential and incidental service allowances with continuity of service.

In view of the above, the High Court granted the application.

Case title: P. Naga Jasmine vs. Andhra Pradesh State

Bench: Judge Ravi Nath Tilhari

Quote: WRITTEN APPLICATION No. 13554 of 2020

Get instant legal updates on mobile – Download the Law Trend app now