In terms of Cl. 17(7), employee attaining 58 yrs of age “may” be continued in service up to 60 yrs of age subject to medical fitness. Cl. 17(7)(iii) is only an enabling provision that enables appellant to continue employee who had attained 58 yrs of age up to 60 yrs provided he/she is medically fit but does not create any right in favour of employee to continue up to 60 yrs of age. Held, First part of subclause (7) lays down that the age of superannuation shall be 58 years. However, it gives an option to the appellant to retire an employee after he or she attains the age of 55 years on three months’ notice without giving any reasons. It also gives an option to employees to take voluntary retirement on completion of the age of 55 years. The word ‘may’ has been used in subclause (7)(iii) of clause 17. It is only an enabling provision that enables the appellant to Civil Appeal No.13398 of 2015 continue an employee in service who has attained the age of 58 years, up to the age of 60 years, provided he or she is medically fit. This clause does not entitle any employee to seek continuation after completion of 58 years of age as a matter of right. The aforesaid clause does not create any right in any of the employees to seek their continuation after 58 years. However, discretionary power has been conferred on the appellant to continue an employee who has attained 58 years of age, till completion of the age of 60 years. Para 9
[ITI Ltd. v. K. Muniswamy, (2023) 4 SCC 373]