DORAISWAMY RAJU, B.N.KIRPAL
S. K. Rathi – Appellant
Versus
Prem Hari Sharma – Respondent
ORDER
Special leave granted.
2. The short question involved in the present case is whether respondent No. 1 is entitled to continue as an acting Principal of the College till 30th June, 2000 as has been ordered by the High Court.
3. It is not in dispute that respondent No. 1, who was a teacher, had been appointed as an acting Principal. He attained the age of 60 years sometime in December, 1999. With an effort to continue in office, he filed a writ petition (C.M. Writ Petition No. 54640 of 1999) and in the impugned order dated 5th January, 2000, the Division Bench of the High Court observed that in view of the decision of another Division Bench in Udai Narain Pandey s case, respondent No. 1 could continue to function as Principal of the Institution till 30th June 2000. Hence this appeal.
4. On a query raised by us, learned Counsel for the respondent drew our attention to a decision of the Government contained in document dated 16th February, 1999, in which it was, inter alia, stated that for teachers like respondent No. 1 the age of superannuation was 60 years. The said decision further states that no extension in service shall be granted but "if the date of superannuation of a teacher
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.