The terms and conditions of take over cannot be altered subsequently by either party, including the beneficiary, as established by relevant judgments.

M.M.Kumar, J.

1. The short issue raised in these two petitions (C.W.P. No. 14246 of 1990 and C.W.P. No. 6648 of 1991) is `whether the terms and conditions of taking over a privately managed aided school could be altered at the instance of an employee who has been taken over.

2. Brief facts of the case are being referred from C.W.P. No. 14296 of 1990. The petitioner was appointed as a teacher on 4.8.1975 in Janta High School, Rattewal, District Hoshiarpur. It was a privately managed recognised school. His appointment was approved on the post of JBT Teacher. For appointment to the post of "Master", which is a post in higher pay scale, the qualification of B.A., B.Ed. is prescribed. The petitioner possessed qualification of B.A., B.Ed. On 22.1.1987, the school was taken over by the Government. The petitioner was also taken over as JBT Teacher on ad hoc basis as he was working against an aided post of JBT Teacher. On 21.10.1988, the services of the petitioner were regularised as JBT Teacher (P-1). The petitioner represented to the Government with a request to adjust him as Social Studies Master from the date of taking over. He claims that his case was recommended by the District Education Officer but he has not been adjusted.

3. The stand of the respondents in the written statement is that the petitioner was taken over as JBT Teacher as he was working against the aided post of JBT Teacher in the erstwhile Janta High School, Rattewal, District Hoshiarpur, as per terms and conditions of taking over. It has further been pointed out that he cannot be granted the higher grade of post of Master merely because of his higher qualifications. In order to become entitled to higher grade of the post of Master he has to be appointed first on the post of Social Studies Master. It has also been denied that the District Education Officer ever recommended the case of the petitioner for absorption as Social Studies Master.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties I am of the considered view that the terms and conditions of take over cannot be changed subsequently by either party including the beneficiary. For the aforesaid view, reliance can be placed on the judgment of Honble the Supreme Court rendered in the case of State of Punjab v. Dev Dutt Kaushal, 1995(4) SCT 575 : 1995 Supp (4) SCC 748. In para 5 of the judgment various conditions of take over were noticed by their Lordships. There was a specific condition that on such take over the Government was to absorb only such staff as was justified on the basis of actual workload in accordance with the norms prescribed under the Government. It was also stipulated that only confirmed and regularly appointed staff through prescribed channel and approved by the University/Department alone was to be taken over. The appointment under the Government was to be subject to the approval of the Public Service Commission wherever the approval was required under the rules and on such appointment under the Government the teachers were to be treated as new entrants. The argument raised by the teacher before Honble the Supreme Court was that he was entitled to continue in service till he was 60 years of age. The aforesaid argument was rejected by observing as under :-

"7. The first claim of the respondent is that he is entitled to continue in service till he attains the age of sixty years. It is not possible to agree. It is admitted on all hands that the age of retirement of the college lecturers under the government is fifty eight years. In view of the terms and conditions of the gift deed mentioned above, it is plain that the respondents plea cannot be accepted. There is no clause or condition in the gift deed preserving or saving the age of retirement prescribed in the said private college. Actually on the take over of the college, the teachers/lecturers had no right as such to be absorbed or to be appointed under the government. Their appointment in government service was subject to fulfillment o