2018 (5) TMI 2169

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rity to Assistant Public Prosecutors, in the matter of retirement age, with Public Prosecutors in the State. 2. According to the Appellant, Assistant Public Prosecutors are appointed to the Magistrate Court to conduct prosecutions as per Section 25 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short "the Code"). The Public Prosecutors are also appointed to conduct prosecutions in the Sessions Court Under Section 24 of the Code. The nature of duties, functions and powers of both Assistant Public Prosecutors and Public Prosecutors are similar. The maximum age for appointment of Public Prosecutors, for a term of 3 years, is 60 years; whereas the age of retirement of Assistant Public Prosecutors appointed prior to 31st March, 2013 is 56 years. It i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....60 years, the members of the Appellant Association who have been appointed prior to 31st March, 2013 and are still serving as Assistant Public Prosecutors are willing to forego the pension for the extra period of service which will accrue from the age of 56 years till 60 years without any demur. 4. Per contra, the Respondent State asserts that the mode of appointment and conditions of service of Assistant Public Prosecutors and Public Prosecutors are entirely different. Assistant Public Prosecutors are selected as per the advice given by the Kerala Public Service Commission according to their merit and Rules for reservation, after conducting a competitive examination and preparation of rank list in accordance with the rules. The Assistan....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....March, 2013, is to be accepted, it will create an anomaly and also discrimination and hardship to the rest of the government employees appointed prior to 1st April, 2013, as they would retire at the age of 56 years. 5. According to the Respondents, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 12703 of 2005, filed by the Appellant was justly rejected by the learned Single Judge on 8th June, 2006 and the Division Bench vide impugned judgment affirmed that decision in Writ Appeal No. 514 of 2008 on 7th March, 2008. The learned Single Judge as well as the Division Bench have noted that Public Prosecutors are not judicial officers and more particularly, the terms and conditions of service of Assistant Public Prosecutors and Public Prosecutors are distinct. Furt....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oyees. They can even be terminated by the Government at any time before the expiry of normal term of appointment, without assigning any reason. The Government is also free to re-appoint any person appointed as Public Prosecutor for a further period subject to eligibility. The fact that the nature of duties and functions of Assistant Public Prosecutors and Public Prosecutors are similar, per se, cannot be the basis to claim parity with Public Prosecutors in respect of age of superannuation. 7. Reliance placed by the Appellant on the factum of officers in Kerala Judicial Service and other officers referred to in Rule 60 (b) to (d) regarding their age of superannuation at 60 years, is also of no avail to the Appellant. The fact that Assista....