IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
PULLA KARTHIK, J.
Mr. T.V. Ramana Rao – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Telangana - Respondent
Writ Petition No.8552 of 2022
Decided On : 01-05-2024
Retirement - Employment - AICTE Act Section List - The court interpreted the AICTE Act, particularly Sections 10 and 23, and the 2019 Regulations, affirming that the age of superannuation for faculty is 65 years, mandating compliance by private institutions for statutory adherence.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a lecturer, challenged the decision to retire him at 58 instead of 65, citing AICTE regulations that mandate a retirement age of 65 for faculty members.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the AICTE regulations are statutory and binding on the institution, thus obligating them to adhere to the prescribed age of superannuation of 65 years.
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to continue in service until the age of 65 as per AICTE regulations despite the institution's rules stating retirement at 58.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that AICTE regulations, being statutory, must be followed by all institutions, including private ones, thus supporting the petitioner's claim for continued service until 65.
Result: The writ petition is allowed, directing the respondents to continue the petitioner in service until he attains the age of 65 years.
ORDER :
(Pulla Karthik, J.) :
Aggrieved by the action of the respondents in contemplating to retire the petitioner on attaining the age of 58 years instead of 65 years and consequently to direct the respondents to continue the petitioner in service till he attains the age of 65 years, the present Writ Petition is filed.
2) Heard Sri Gangaiah Naidu, learned senior counsel, representing Ms.G. Bhanu Priya, learned for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Services-I appearing for respondents 1 and 2, Sri Mahaboob Ali, learned counsel for respondent No.3, and Sri M. Surender Rao, learned senior counsel appearing for respondents 4 and 5.
3) It has been contended by the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner is an M.Tech (Mechanical) degree holder and he was appointed as Lecturer in Mechanical department of the 5th respondent-Institution on 16.06.1997, after following due procedure, qualification and experience prescribed by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE). Hence, he is entitled to be continued upto 65 years of age, as per the statutory regulations issued by AICTE. Learned senior counsel has contended that these regulations are statutory and mandatory in nature and non-implementation of these regulations would render respondents 4 and 5 in-eligible for approval being granted by AICTE every year, which is sine qua non for running the institution. Learned counsel has vehemently contended that the 5th respondent-Institution is approved by AICTE and regulated by the Rules and Regulations issued by AICTE from time to time. In exercise of the powers conferred under sub-section (1) of Section 23 read with Section 10 (g) (h) and (I) of the AICTE Act, 1987, the AICT has issued All India Council for Technical Education Pay Scales, Service Conditions and Minimum Qualifications for the Appointment of Teachers and other Academic Staff such as Library and Physical Education Personnel in Technical Institutions and Measures for the Maintenance of Standards in Technical Education – (Diploma) Regulations, 2019’ (in short ‘2019 Regulations’) on 01.05.2019. According to the said Regulations, which govern the service conditions of the Teaching Staff, the age of superannuation of faculty members is ‘65’ years. While drawing the attention of this Court to Regulation 2.12 of 2019 Regulations, the learned senior counsel has contended that even as per the 2010 Regulations, which were superseded by 2019 Regulations, the age of superannuation of teaching staff is ‘65’ years. Thus, the learned senior counsel has contended that the AICTE Regulations being statutory in nature, it is mandatory for any AICTE approved Institution to comply with the said Regulations. In exercise of the power conferred under clause (i) of Section 10 of the AICTE Act, initially, the AICTE has made recommendations regarding revision of pay-scales and service conditions of Teachers of Technical Institutions by its Notification F.No.1-65/CD/NCE/98-99, dated 30.12.1999, exclusively applicable to Teachers, Librarians and Physical Education personnel in Diploma Level Technical Institutions covered under the AICTE Act and as per Regulation 12.0, the age of superannuation of Teachers in Diploma level Institutions was increased to 62 years, as per Regulation 2.4 the pay-scales, qualifications and other associated terms as given in the said notification dated 30.12.1999 shall be applicable to all self-financing (Private unaided) Institutions such as the 5th respondent-Institution. It is further contended that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pramod v. State of Maharashtra, (2016) AIR (SC) 204 has held that the AICTE Regulations are statutory in nature and the age of superannuation prescribed under the AICTE Regulations has to be followed. Learned senior counsel has further contended that the AICTE has amended the 2010 Regulations in the year 2019 reaffirming the age of superannuation as 65 years, which was extendable upto 70 years of age ba
Pramod v. State of Maharashtra
Marwari Balika Vidyalaya v. Asha Srivastava
K.K. Saxena v. International Commission
Ramakrishna Mission v. Kago Kunya
St. Mary’s Education Society v. Rajendra Prasad Bhargava
Parshvanath Charitable Trust v. All India Council for Technical Education
Andi Mukta Sadguru Shree Muktajee Vandas Swami Suvarna Jayanti Mahotsav Smarak Trust v. V.R. Rudani
K. Krishnamacharyulu v. Sri Venkateswara Hindu College of Engineer
AICTE regulations mandating a retirement age of 65 for faculty are statutory and binding on all institutions, including private ones.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the AICTE Regulations, UGC Regulations, and Council of Architecture Regulations are applicable to the age of superannuation of faculty members....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the binding nature of the Regulations, 2010 framed by the All India Council for Technical Education, which enhanced the age of superannuation fo....
AICTE Regulations on superannuation age prevail over state rules for technical institution faculty unless state formally adopts otherwise.
AICTE regulations prevail over State laws in conflicts regarding retirement age, and courts should be cautious in granting interim relief that extends service beyond retirement age.
The age of superannuation for university directors is governed by AICTE regulations, which allow for retirement at 65 years, and any university resolution attempting to reduce this age must comply wi....
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.