https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171222 The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, ruling that Rule 2046/2(a) did not grant the appellant the right to be retained in service beyond age 55, even if efficient. The court also rejected the discrimination claim related to notifications by the Railway Board, finding them reasonable. The appellant's arguments were deemed unsubstantiated, leading to the dismissal of the appeal without costs due to the appellant's pauper status. en-us Thu, 16 Mar 1961 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Jul 2015 11:30:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171222 The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, ruling that Rule 2046/2(a) did not grant the appellant the right to be retained in service beyond age 55, even if efficient. The court also rejected the discrimination claim related to notifications by the Railway Board, finding them reasonable. The appellant's arguments were deemed unsubstantiated, leading to the dismissal of the appeal without costs due to the appellant's pauper status. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 16 Mar 1961 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171222