The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the term 'teacher' under the University Act and the entitlement of Librarians to the benefits of teachers, including the retirement age of 60 years.

COMMON ORDER:

The writ petitioner in W.P.No.14915 of 1997 by name A.Pichai was working as Assistant Librarian in the year 1997. Since he completed the age of 58 years, he was superannuated.

2. The petitioner in W.P.No.10328 of 1999, by name S. Kaliaperumal was working as the Deputy Librarian. Since he completed the age of 58, he was superannuated. Both the persons have filed the present writ petitions challenging that their age of superannuation is 60 years as that of teachers and not 58 years. Sixty years is applicable only for teaching staff. Therefore, the main point to be considered in these writ petitions is, whether the Librarian, Assistant Librarian or Deputy Librarian are teaching staff within the definition of the University Act or as a non-teaching staff.

3. Mr. S. Sethuraman, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that in SYED AMIN KHALANDAR VS. THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION AND TWO OTHERS reported in 1997(II) CTC 87, this Court held that the Librarian in Private Colleges falls within the definition of term `Teacher' and he referred to the definition of teacher in Madras University Act, 1923, where teachers means such as "Professors, Assistant Professors, Readers, Lecturers, Demonstrators, Tutors, Librarians and other like persons as may be declared to be teachers by the statutes framed under any law for the time being in force governing a university". Following this definition, this Court has held that the post of Librarian also falls within definition of teacher. He referred to another judgment in T.PADMANABHAN VS. THE TAMIL UNIVERSITY, THANJAVUR, REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR reported in 2202(2) CTC 754. In that case, The Tamil University Act declare Librarian as belonging to academic staff but Appendix-I to that Act show the post of Librarian as non-academic staff. In these circumstances, the Court held that Librarian is a teacher.

4. He also referred to the judgment of the Supreme Court in P.S.RAMAMOHANA RAO VS. A.P.AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY AND ANOTHER reported in 1997-8 Supreme Court Cases 350, wherein the Supreme Court held as follows:-

"The Physical Director has multifarious duties. He not only arranges games and sports for the students every evening and looks after the procurement of sports material and the maintenance of the grounds but also arranges inter-class and inter-college tournaments and accompanies the students' team when they go for the inter-university tournaments. For that purpose, it is one of his important duties to guide them about the rules of the various games and sports. Different games and sports have different rules and practices and unless the students are guided about the said rules and practices they will not be able to play the games and participate in the sports in a proper manner. It is inherent in the duties of a Physical Director that he imparts to the students various skills and techniques of these games and sports. There are a large number of indoor and outdoor games in which the students have to be trained. Therefore, he has to teach them several skills and techniques of these games apart from the rules applicable to these games. The Physical Director therefore comes within the definition of a teacher in Section 2(n) of the Act."

Relying upon the above judgment, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the Librarian is a teacher, since his function involves teaching also.

5. Mrs.D.Geetha, learned counsel for the second respondent submitted that Syndicate of Annamalai University has passed a Resolution specifically declaring that the Librarians are not teaching staff and they cannot be treated as teachers. Further, the learned counsel contended that the services of these persons utilised only occasionally when emergeny arises due to vacancy in the teaching staff. Only then, they were teaching the students. Therefore, from that they cannot be treated as "teachers", as they are not regularly teaching. Therefore, they cannot be treated as teach