Back
SUPREME COURT
N/A, J
State of U.P. and Others v. Dr. Ramesh Prasad
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. notice served on respondent assumed. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. definition of university teacher under the act. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. regulations on retirement of government servants. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. comparison of employment rules for university vs state teachers. (Para 8) |
| 5. final ruling on the illegality of the high court's order. (Para 9) |
1 Leave granted.
2. Though notice was sent to the respondent on September 10, 1993 in usual course, till date the report of the service of notice has not been sent nor the acknowledgment received. Under these circumstances, the notice must be deemed to have been served on the respondent.
3. The only controversy in this case is whether the respondent teacher imparting teaching in Moti Lal Nehru Medical College, Agra is entitled to remain in service till he attains the age of superannuation of 60 years. Making such a claim, the respondent filed a writ petition in the High Court. The High Court even without considering the relevant provisions had directed the State Government in the impugned order dated December 21, 1990 in CMWP No. 33277/90 to continue the respondent in service till he attains the age of superannuation of 60 years virtually allowi
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
