+91 964 334 1948
30 May 2025, 11:10 AM
The Supreme Court recently ruled that an employee does not possess an inherent right to determine their retirement age. This authority lies with the State, which must exercise it reasonably, adhering to the principle of equality enshrined under Article 14.
The Court said that “an employee has no fundamental right as regards the age at which he would retire.”
The bench comprising Justices Manoj Misra and KV Viswanathan heard the case where the Appellant, a locomotor-disabled electrician, was forced to retire at 58 years, while similarly placed visually impaired employees were allowed to serve until 60 years.
The retirement age of visually impaired employees was enhanced to 60 years vide Office Memorandum (“OM”) dated 29.03.2013. Later on, OM was withdrawn by the State government on 04.11.2019, keeping the retirement age as 58 years. The Appellant was retired on 18.09.2018 and was granted an extension till the date of withdrawal of the OM by the State government.
The dispute occurred when the Appellant claimed continuation of employment beyond the date of withdrawal of the OM, i.e., 04.11.2019 i.e., till the completion of 60 years of age.
Setting aside the impugned decision which had refused to allow the same retirement benefits to the Appellant as given to other similarly situated employees, the Court noted that the Appellant is entitled to same benefits as granted to other employees but clarified that the benefits would accrue to him till the date of withdrawal of the OM, as the OM was in force till 04.11.2019.
But, the same would not grant him the right to claim extension of service beyond 04.11.2019, as the fixation of date of retirement is a policy decision of the executive, where the employee lacks the right to determine their retirement age, the court said.
“Hence, in our view, on the date when the OM dated 04.11.2019 was issued, no right vested in the appellant to continue in service up to the age of 60 years. We are therefore of the considered view that the appellant is not entitled to continue in service beyond 04.11.2019 i.e., the date on which the OM dated 29.03.2013 was withdrawn.”, the court observed.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the appeal in part, noting that the Appellant shall be entitled to the benefit of continuance in service until 04.11.2019, followed by entitlement to full wages from 01.10.2018 to 04.11.2019, with all consequential benefits that may impact his pension.
Also From Judgment: Retirement Age Extension Given To One Disabled Category Can't Be Denied To Persons With Other Disabilities : Supreme Court
Case Title: KASHMIRI LAL SHARMA VERSUS HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD. & ANR.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 646