IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
VIPIN SANGHI, RAKESH THAPLIYAL, JJ.
Harish Chandra Chandola - Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others - Respondents
Writ Petition (S/B) No. 218 of 2023
Decided On : 26-05-2023
Superannuation - Employment - The Supreme Court held that the session benefit would be available to all employees retiring after 30th of June, and they shall be entitled to continue till 30th of June of the next year.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a Professor at a university, challenged an order fixing his retirement date as 31.08.2023, claiming entitlement to continue serving till 30.06.2024 as per Statute 16.24.
Finding of the Court:
The Supreme Court held that the petitioner is entitled to continue in service/re-employment after 30.08.2023, till 30.06.2024, based on the interpretation of Statute 16.24.
Issues: The issue revolved around the interpretation of Statute 16.24 regarding the superannuation and re-employment of university teachers.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the interpretation of Statute 16.24, which provided for the continuation of service/re-employment till the end of the following June for employees retiring after 30th of June.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the petitioner was granted the right to remain in service/re-employment after 30.08.2023, till 30.06.2024.
JUDGMENT :
Vipin Sanghi, J.
Issue notice.
2. Counsel for the respondents appear and accept notice.
3. The reliefs sought in the present writ petition are the following :
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to give the benefit of re-employment to the petitioner as per para 16.24 of the First Statutes till 30th June 2024.
(iii) Issue any other writ, rule or direction, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
(iv) Award cost of the petition.”
4. The case of the petitioner is that his due date of retirement is 31.08.2023. He is working as Professor, Department of Physics, D.S.B. Campus, Kumaun University, Nainital.
5. The petitioner has impugned the order dated 03.11.2022, whereby he has been shown to retire from service on 31.08.2023. The petitioner claims that he cannot be retired on the said date, and he is entitled to continue to serve till 30.06.2024, in terms of Statute 16.24. The petitioner places reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 3493 of 2020, Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others, decided along with several other civil appeals, on 16.10.2020.
6. The Supreme Court considered the aforesaid Statute, which reads as follows :
(2) No extension in service beyond the age of superannuation shall be granted to any teacher after the date of commencement of these statutes.
Provided that a teacher whose date of superannuation does not fall on June 30, shall continue on service till the end of the academic session, that is June 30, following and will be treated as on re-employment from the date immediately following his superannuation till June, 30, following.
(Provided further that such physically and mentally fit teachers shall be reappointed for a further period of two years, after June, 30, following the date of their superannuation as were imprisoned for taking part in freedom struggle of 1942 and are getting freedom fighters pension)
Provided also that the teachers who were re-appointed in accordance with the second proviso as it existed prior to the commencement to the Kumaun University (Twenty-third amendment) First Statute, 1988 and a period of one year has not elapsed after the expiry of the period of their reemployment, may be considered for re-employment for a further period of one year.”
7. The Supreme Court has held that the session benefit would be available to all such employees, who are retiring after 30th of June, in a particular year, and they shall be entitled to continue till 30th of June of the next year.
8. The finding of the Supreme Court reads as follows :
15. For the foregoing reasons, the impugned judgment and orders of the High Court are set aside. The appellants are entitled, consequently, to continue till the end of the following June on re-employment. If any of them has been superannuated, he or she shall be issued with orders of reinstatement, with full salary for the period they were out of employment, and allow
Employees retiring after 30th of June are entitled to continue in service/re-employment till 30th of June of the next year as per Statute 16.24.
Teachers superannuating mid-academic session entitled to re-employment till June 30 under university statutes; provision applies universally; post-superannuation amendments prospective, cannot divest....
The court established that the definition of 'Teacher' under the Uttar Pradesh University Act includes the petitioner, entitling him to retirement benefits at 65 years.
Extension of service is a concession for the benefit of students and cannot be claimed as a right.
Vested rights to pension cannot be revoked by subsequent amendments or government orders unless explicitly stated to have retrospective effect; the age of superannuation is determined by existing reg....
Court cannot exercise power akin to Article 142 of the Constitution of India in the face of the express provisions and in violation of the law.
University teachers' retirement age is governed by specific statutes, distinct from state-maintained institutions, establishing a compulsory retirement age of 58.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.