Supreme Court Sets Aside HC Order Letting Bank Staff Work Beyond 58

The Supreme Court recently set aside a Punjab and Haryana High Court order that had allowed a co-operative bank employee to remain in office after turning 58.

A bench comprising Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Prashant Kumar Mishra delivered the verdict on October 14, 2025, in an appeal filed by Harpreet Singh, Director of the Haryana State Co-operative Apex Bank Ltd., challenging the High Court’s interim order passed in May 2025.

The High Court had permitted Om Parkash Rana, a staff member of the Karnal Central Cooperative Bank Limited, to continue working beyond the retirement age of 58, relying on its earlier orders in similar cases (Hardev Kaur Vs. State of Haryana and Ors, 2015), where employees were allowed to serve till 60 years of age pending adjudication.

However, the apex court found fault with this approach. It reiterated that courts should refrain from issuing interim directions permitting employees to remain in service after their age of superannuation, describing such orders as “contrary to public policy and the settled canons of law".

“In cases where a person has attained the age of superannuation as prescribed under the applicable rules, no interim order should be passed permitting continuation in service beyond that age,” the court said in its order.

The bench noted that extending service through interim relief can create administrative complications and irreversible consequences. “If the writ petition ultimately fails, there cannot be any turning back of the clock,” the judges observed, warning that all decisions taken by the employee during the extended period could become the subject of further disputes.

The Supreme Court emphasized that the tests for granting interim injunctions which include a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable loss, must be applied judiciously. In this case, it said, there was no irreparable loss to the employee since he could be fully compensated with back wages and monetary benefits if he ultimately succeeded in his writ petition.

“On the other hand, if the writ petition fails, there will be irreparable harm to the interest of the appellant,” the court held, agreeing with the bank’s contention that the High Court’s order disrupted settled service norms.

Setting aside the High Court’s interim direction, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal but clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the employee’s claim. The issue of whether the retirement age should indeed be extended to 60 years would remain open for the High Court to decide in the pending writ petition.

Case Title: Harpreet Singh Vs Om Prakash Rana & Ors

Bench: Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Prashant Kumar Mishra