SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(P&H) 2423

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.
Dr. Madhulika – Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab & Ors. – Respondents
CWP NO. 27023 of 2014 (O&M)
Decided On : 02-06-2023

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Jatin Salwan, Advocate; For the Petitioner In CWP-27023 of 2014 and 1431 of 2016.
Mr. Vikas Chatrath, Advocate; For the Petitioner In CWP-6360 of 2020.
Mr. Vivek Slathia, Advocate; For the Petitioner In CWP-6807 of 2021.
For the Respondent: Mr. Vikas Mohan Gupta, Addl. AG, Punjab

Headnote:(A) Punjab Medical Education State Service (Class II) Rules, 1979 - Age of superannuation - Petitioners, once TLM re-designated from Lecturers, sought to retire at 62 years, contrary to PCMS rules. Court found they must retire at 58 years as TLMs, holding no teaching experience per the 1979 Rules. Petitioners were beneficiaries of PCMS rules for promotions and pay scales, reinforcing their classification. (Paras 1-16)

(B) Writ Jurisdiction - Judicial review of administrative decisions - A speaking order by competent authority may only be set aside if proven illegal or arbitrary - Interim orders do not preclude the Court from final decision. (Paras 13-15)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners were re-designated as TLM and claimed retirement age of 62 years; however, they failed to meet requisite experience as per the 1979 Rules, with government clarifying their retirement age should be 58 years. Government decisions on cadre eligibility and retirement were underscored through a detailed speaking order.

Findings of Court:
The petitioners were ruled to retire at the age of 58 years, confirming their classification as TLMs, not part of the teaching cadre, and thus, ineligible for the retirement age of 62 years.

Issues: The central issue was the applicable retirement age for TLMs versus teaching faculty, particularly focusing on required teaching experience under the 1979 Rules.

Ratio Decidendi: The court upheld that the petitioners contained no sufficient evidence proving teaching qualifications as mandated by the 1979 Rules and highlighted reliance on pay scale benefits incompatible with seeking extended retirement ages afforded to teaching cadre, concluding legal precedent over any administrative error in prior retirements.

Result: Writ petitions dismissed; retirement age confirmed as 58 years.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Anil Kshetarpal, J.

With the consent of the learned counsel representing the parties, by this common order, a batch of four civil writ petitions i.e CWP-27023-2014, 1431-2016, 6360-2020 and 6807-2021 involving an identical issue with regard to the retirement age of the petitioner, shall stand disposed of.

2. While deciding the case, the reference would be made to the paperbooks of CWP-27023-2014 and CWP-6360-2020. At the outset, it is important to note that out of four writ petitions filed by the equal number of petitioners, three have already retried on attaining the age of 62 years whereas Dr. Anil Kumar is the only one who is still continuing in service.

3. All the petitioners were the members of the Punjab Civil Medical Services (PCMS), a Department that deals with providing health and family welfare. The doctors are posted in these services at the hospitals, clinics etc. There is another separate cadre in the Department for medical education that primarily deals with imparting education to the students in various Govt. medical colleges situated in the State of Punjab. Though, the petitioners were working as PCMS Doctors in the various Govt. Hospitals and clinics, however, on the basis of communication dated 14.12.2007, they applied for the post of Lecturer by way of transfer. This notice of recruitment was restricted to PCMS Doctors serving in the State of Punjab. It was notified that PCMS doctors possessing the requisite qualification and experience as per Annexure-II of the Punjab Medical Education State Service (Class II) Rules, 1979 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1979 Rules'), will be posted as Lecturer or Senior Lecturer by way of transfer. For the post of Lecturer, as per Appendix C of the aforesaid Rules the following minimum qualifications are required:-

    "2. Lecturers:-

    (i) Basic University Medical Qualification included in the First or the Second Schedule or part II of the Third Schedule to the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, with good academic career except in the case of Bio-Chemistry where it is preferential.

    (ii) Must be registered under the State or Central Medical Registration Act, except in the case of non-medical men.

    (iii) Must possess atleast two years teaching experience as Demonstrator, Registrar or Research Assistant in a teaching institution.

    Note 1.- Benefit upto the extent of one year in allied basic or clinical subject and for rural service shall be admissible.

    Note 2:- Experience on the post of Assistant Demonstrator or Assistant Registrar will be counted as half as compared to experience on the post of Demonstrator or Registrar.

    Note 3:- (I) In the Departments of Anatomy, Physiology, Pharmacalogy and Microbiology, in the event of non-availability of suitable qualified medical men for teaching these subjects, non medical scientists possessing M.Sc qualification in the subject concerned preferably possessing doctorate qualifications and possessing requisite experience as laid down in the rules in respective subjects may be appointed upto a maximum of 30 per cent of the total strength of the teaching staff of the concerned department."

4. The petitioners were selected and appointed as the Lecturers, however, on the objection of the Medical Council of India, the petitioners and various other similarly situated doctors were redesignated as Tutor/Lecturer-cum-Medical Officer (hereinafter referred to as 'TLM'). On 23.12.2013, the Govt. took a conscious decision that the experienced earned by the TLM would be treated as the teaching experience, however, they will be considered for promotion to the higher post as per the Punjab Medical Education State Service Rules on the basis of seniority/merit of the PCMS cadre. The relevant extract of the decision reads as under:-

    "As per proposal dated 05.08.2013 submitted by Director, Research and Medical Education, Teaching job of Medical Officer as Tutor/Lecturer-cum-Medical Officer would be treated as Teaching Experience. The benefit of Experience Cert

          Click Here to Read the rest of this document
          1
          2
          3
          4
          5
          6
          7
          8
          9
          10
          11
          SupremeToday Portrait Ad
          supreme today icon
          logo-black

          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

          qr

          Scan Me!

          India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

          For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

          whatsapp-icon Back to top