IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
RAVINDRA MAITHANI, ALOK MAHRA, JJ.
Nagendra Prasad Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and Others – Respondents
Writ Petition Service Bench No. 793 of 2024
Decided On : 05-01-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition seeks quashing of superannuation order for re-employment benefit. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. teachers retiring mid-session entitled to re-employment till june 30. (Para 3 , 4 , 6) |
| 3. provision limited to pre-1975 teachers and deleted by 2025 amendment. (Para 5) |
| 4. petitioner is teacher; statute requires continuation; amendment not retrospective. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 5. order illegal; re-employment granted till end of academic session. (Para 10 , 11) |
JUDGMENT :
1. By means of the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned order dated 28.05.2024 passed by respondent no.3, whereby the date of superannuation of the petitioner has been fixed as 31.01.2025. A further prayer has been made for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant the benefit of re-employment till the end of the academic session, i.e., 30.06.2025, in terms of paragraph 16.24 of the First Statute of Kumaun University.
2. Brief facts, as borne out from the record, are that the petitioner is presently working as Assistant Professor, Physical Education Department/Sports Officer, Kumaun University, Nainital. The date of birth of the petitioner is 01.02.1960, and he was shown to be superannuating on 31.01.2025 on attaining the age of 65 years. The petitioner was initially appointed as a Coach in the Physical Education Department in the year 1990. Subsequently, in the year 1998, he was appointed as Deputy Sports Officer/Deputy Sports Secretary. Thereafter, on 20.07.2008, after undergoing a regular selection process, the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Professor, Physical Education Department, Kumaun University, on a substantive basis. The grievance of the petitioner arises from the impugned order dated 28.05.2024, passed by respondent no.3, whereby the petitioner has been directed to retire on 31.01.2025, without granting him the benefit of continuation till the end of the academic session, as provided under paragraph 16.24 of the First Statute of Kumaun University.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner attained the age of 65 years on 31.01.2025, and since his date of superannuation does not fall on 30th June, he is statutorily entitled to continue till the end of the academic session, i.e., 30.06.2025, and such continuation is to be treated as re-employment; that, the petitioner is a teacher involved in classroom teaching, which is also evident from the letter dated 07.12.2024 issued by the Head of the Department, Physical Education, recommending the petitioner for re- employment; that, respondent no.3 has failed to consider Section 49 of the Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act read with paragraph 16.24 of the First Statute of Kumaun University, rendering the impugned order illegal and unsustainable. Reliance has been placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Naveen Chand Dhaundiyal vs. State of Uttarakhand , (2023) 12 SCC 463, wherein it has been held that teachers retiring mid- academic session are entitled to continue till the end of the academic year.
4. He would further submit that Section 49 of the Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act empowers the Statutes to govern service conditions of teachers, including age of retirement and the Paragraph 16.24 of the First Statute of Kumaun University provides as under:
“16.24 (1) The age of superannuation of a teacher of the University shall be sixty-five years.
(2) No extension in service beyond the age of superannuation shall be granted:
Provided that a teacher whose date of superannuation does not fall on June 30 shall continue in service till the end of the academic session, i.e., June 30 following, and shall be treated as on re-employment from the date immediately following his superannuation till 30th June.”
5. Learned counsel for respondent nos.2 and 3 would submit that Paragraph 16.24 applies only to tea
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.
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.
The court established that once a teacher has reached the age of superannuation, any extension of service must be explicitly provided by law, and the provisions of the UP Intermediate Education Act, ....
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.