Kashmiri Lal Sharma vs Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Ltd. 2025 INSC 472 - Service Law - RPwD Act

Service Law - Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 - The benefit of extension of retirement age as provided under the OM dated 9.03.2013 could not have been confined to visually impaired category. Rather, it should be available to persons suffering from all such benchmark disabilities as are specified in the 1995 Act and the 2016 Act. No intelligible basis to confer benefit of age extension to one disabled category and deny it to the other when both are specified in the 1995 Act as well as the 2016 Act. In this view of the matter, if benefit of extension of retirement age is available to visually impaired category, the same ought to be available to other categories of disabilities specified in the 1995 Act as reiterated in the 2016 Act. (Para 14)

Service Law - An employee has no fundamental right as regards the age at which he would retire. Moreover, termination of service of an employee on account of reaching the age of superannuation in accordance with law or rules regulating the conditions of service does not amount to his removal from service within the meaning of Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India. (Para 18)