https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172914 Judicial officers' retirement before age 60 was examined against service rules fixing superannuation at 58 years, with continuation to 60 dependent on suitability assessment. The Court noted that the High Court could assess fitness before officers crossed 58 years, and that the committee's evaluation approved by the Full Court was not unauthorized merely because an amended rule was to operate later. The compulsory retirement rule for public interest was also found inapplicable on the stated facts because its requirements were not established. Constitutional jurisdiction was nevertheless declined in view of the service records and the nature of judicial service. en-us Tue, 22 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 Jul 2016 12:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172914 Judicial officers' retirement before age 60 was examined against service rules fixing superannuation at 58 years, with continuation to 60 dependent on suitability assessment. The Court noted that the High Court could assess fitness before officers crossed 58 years, and that the committee's evaluation approved by the Full Court was not unauthorized merely because an amended rule was to operate later. The compulsory retirement rule for public interest was also found inapplicable on the stated facts because its requirements were not established. Constitutional jurisdiction was nevertheless declined in view of the service records and the nature of judicial service. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 22 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172914