Back
OM PRAKASH SHUKLA
Prem Chandra Mishra – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Prin. Secy. (Higher Education) Lko. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Om Prakash Shukla, J.
1. These bunch of writ petitions involve common questions of law and fact. It is the case of the petitioners that they were entitled to be allowed to continue their services as teachers in the university concerned till the age of 65 years and relies on three identical orders passed by a coordinate bench of this Court in similar situation in the following cases:
(ii) Order dated 11.05.2022 passed in Writ A No. 7085 of 2022 titled as Chandra Mohan Ojha & 19 others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors;
(iii) Order dated 27.05.2022 passed in Writ A No. 3369 of 2022 titled as Dr. Anil Kumar Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors;
2. All the petitioners have common ground, that in all these cases, it was directed to the state Government to incorporate the necessary amendments in the respective university statues, so as to raise/increase the age of superannuation from the existing 62 years to 65 years. Since, common ground is engaging the attention of this court in all these bunch of writ petitions, these petitions are being disposed o
Regulations framed under Clause (g) of Section 26, which dealt with regulation and maintenance of standards and regulation of facilities in Universities.
The court established that teaching staff have a right to enforce the statutory age of superannuation of 65 years, as per the University Grants Commission regulations.
UGC Regulations prescribing superannuation at 62 years for college teachers not binding on State Government employees unless expressly adopted by State via service rule amendments.
Changes to retirement age rules are prospective and cannot be applied retroactively unless explicitly stated.
(1) It is mandatory for UGC to be guided by directions issued by Central Government on questions of policy relating to national purposes by discharging its functions under UGC Act, 1956.(2) A Judgmen....
University Grants Commission Regulations on superannuation are recommendatory and not binding on state universities, allowing discretion in their implementation.
The court emphasized that the applicability of government orders with retrospective effect and the re-appointment of superannuated individuals are within the executive domain and cannot be directed b....
increasing the age of superannuation only in the case of Professors, there is no violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, as alleged, for the simple reason that whereas equals cannot be ....
Hon’ble Supreme Court has already found that “UGC Regulations” had undergone a change, consequent to decision of Government of India mentioned above and , an argument on contrary is tenuous.
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
