Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
G.S.Sandhawalia, Jagmohan Bansal, JJ.
Punjab University, Chandigarh & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Inder Mohan Joshi & Ors. – Respondents
LPA No. 1104 of 2017 (O&M) with LPA No. 1430 of 2017 (O&M) with LPA No. 1176 of 2017 (O&M) with LPA No. 1132 of 2017 (O&M) with LPA No. 921 of 2017 (O&M) with LPA No. 872 of 2017 (O&M) with LPA No. 873 of 2017 (O&M) with LPA No. 922 of 2017 (O&M)
Decided On : 28-09-2022
JUDGEMENT - [KEYWORD] - [SUBJECT] - [ACT SECTION LIST] - [SUMMARY]
Fact of the Case:
The appellant-University is a University which has been constituted under Panjab University Act, 1947 read with Punjab Re-organization Act, 1966. It is apt to notice that appellant-University is not a Central University. The Central Government provides funds to the appellant-University to the extent of 60% through Union Territory whereas 40% of the grant is met by State of Punjab. The University was originally created under Panjab University Act, 1947 and after coming into force Punjab Re-organization Act, 1966, the appellant acquired character of inter-state body corporate, as has been held by the Co-ordinate Bench in A.C.Julka and others vs. Panjab University and others, 2008 SCC Online 1374.
Finding of the Court:
The writ petitioners are not entitled to benefit of gratuity, increment, pension on the basis of last pay drawn by counting their period of service during which they served on the basis of stay granted by this Court. Learned Single Judge though declined prayer of the writ petitioners qua gratuity, increment, counting the period of service for pension, however, relying upon his earlier judgment in Paramjit Singh Bansal vs. Panjab University, Chandigarh and others, CWP No. 2873 of 2005 decided on 6.2.2017, held that if petitioners have some earned leave to their credit for the period they worked beyond the age of 60 years, they shall be entitled to encash the same subject to limitation prescribed under the Panjab University Regulation.
Issues: 1. Whether principle of constructive res judicata is applicable in the present case? 2. Whether the writ petition was liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches? 3. Whether in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, leave encashment can be considered as part of salary? 4. Whether writ petitioners are entitled to retiral benefits by calculating the extended period of their service?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The principle of constructive res judicata is not applicable in the present case as the Division Bench of this Court while adjudicating the question of entitlement of petitioners qua increase of age from 60 to 62 years, however, Court did not advert with question of entitlement of salary and other benefits. 2. The writ petitions were not hit by principle of constructive res judicata, and it would be unfair to conclude that learned Single Judge should have dismissed writ petitions on the ground of delay and laches. 3. Leave encashment cannot be considered as part of salary in the present case as there is no specific rule/regulation permitting leave encashment beyond the age of 60 years and even as per impugned judgment of learned Single Judge, the writ petitioners-teachers could not be held entitled to encashment of earned leave. 4. The writ petitioners are not entitled to retiral benefits for the period beyond the date of their superannuation i.e. 60 years.
Final Decision: Accordingly, appeals of appellant-University are allowed and appeals of writ petitioners are hereby dismissed.
JUDGMENT
Jagmohan Bansal, J. - By this common order, appeal Nos. 1104, 1132, 1176, 1430, 872, 873, 921 and 922 of 2017 filed under Clause X of Letters Patent, involving identical issue, are hereby adjudicated. One set of Letters Patent Appeals (LPA Nos. 1104, 1132, 1176 and 1430 of 2017) has been filed by the Panjab University, Chandigarh (for short 'appellant-University) and another set of Letters Patent Appeals (LPA Nos. 872, 873, 921 and 922 of 2017) has been filed by respondents (for short 'writ-petitioners'). The appellant-University is claiming that learned Single Judge vide impugned order dated 15.3.2017 has wrongly extended benefit of leave encashment for the period of service beyond 60 years and writ-petitioners are claiming that learned Single Judge has wrongly denied benefit of increments, gratuity and other retiral benefits for the said period of service beyond 60 years.
2. The appellant is a University which has been constituted under Panjab University Act, 1947 read with Punjab Re-organization Act, 1966. It is apt to notice that appellant-University is not a Central University. The Central Government provides funds to the appellant-University to the extent of 60% through Union Territory whereas 40% of the grant is met by State of Punjab. The University was originally created under Panjab University Act, 1947 and after coming into force Punjab Re-organization Act, 1966, the appellant acquired character of inter-state body corporate, as has been held by the Co-ordinate Bench in A.C.Julka and others vs. Panjab University and others, 2008 SCC Online 1374.
Facts
3. As common issues are involved in all the appeals, thus, for the sake of connivence, facts are borrowed from LPA No. 1104 of 2017 titled as 'Panjab University vs. Dr. Inder Mohan Joshi'. Dr. Inder Mohan Joshi, the writ-petitioner, on 3.2.1971 joined as Teaching Assistant in Department of Chemistry, Panjab University, Chandigarh. In 1974, he was appointed as Lecturer and thereafter in 1998, he was promoted as Professor of Chemistry.
As per Regulation 17.3 of Chapter V (A) of the conditions of service of University, the petitioner being member of teaching staff was bound to retire on attaining the age of 60 years and no extension in service could be granted. For ready reference, Regulation 17.3 is reproduced as below:-
' 17.3 All Whole-time members of the teaching staff, as defined in Regulation 1.1 of the Chapter V (A), shall retire on attaining the age of 60 years and no extension in service shall be granted.'
4. The service conditions of teachers of Universities are regulated/modified from time to time by incorporating notifications issued by University Grants Commission (for short 'UGC') as well Government of India. The UGC while adopting 5th Pay Commission with effect from 1.1.1996 issued letter dated 24.12.1998 having title 'Revision of Pay Scales, Minimum Qualifications for Appointment of Teachers in Universities & Colleges and other measures for the Maintenance of Standards, 1998'. Letter dated 1.1.1996 issued by UGC inter alia provided that State Governments shall implement entire scheme of revision of pay scales. Para 16 of scheme envisaged by UGC enjoined that teachers will retire at the age of 62. However, it was open to a University to re-employee a superannuated teacher according to existing guidelines upto the age of 65 years. Para 16 of the Scheme forming part of letter dated 24.12.1998 is reproduced as below:-
'16.0.0 SUPERANNUATION AND RE-EMPLOYMENT OF TEACHERS 16.1.0 Teachers will retire at the age of 62. However, it is open to a University or a college to re-employ a superannuated teacher according to the existing guidelines framed by the UGC up to the age of 65 years.
16.2.0 Age of retirement of Registrars, Librarians, Physical Education personnel, Controllers of Examinations, Finance Officers and such other University employees who are being treated at par with the teachers and whose age of superannuation was 60 years, would be 62 years. No reemp
Changes to retirement age rules are prospective and cannot be applied retroactively unless explicitly stated.
Article 309 of Constitution of India deals with conditions of Service which include age of superannuation.
Post-retiral benefits cannot be claimed without explicit legal provisions; temporary status of an institution does not confer entitlement to benefits as a permanent employee.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
