Shailendra Kumar Bundela vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Sanjay Yadav, J.—Heard.

Order dated 8.2.2011 retiring the petitioner on superannuation at the age of 62 years is being questioned by the petitioner on the ground that being a Technical Assistant in Technical Educational Institution governed by University Grant Commission norms which declared to be a teaching post as per Appendix A with the order dated 14.11.1986 (Annexure P/2) , petitioner has the entitlement for enhanced age of retirement on superannuation of 65 years as determined by Gazette notification dated 13.3.2010.

Vide notification dated 13.3.2010, Regulation viz. All India Council for Technical Education (Pay Scales, Service Conditions and Qualifications for the Teachers and other Academic Staff in Technical Institutions (Degree) Regulations, 2010 whereunder -

"8. Other terms and conditions:

(a) to (e) xxx xxx xxx

(f) Age of Superannuation:

(i) In order to meet the situation arising out of shortage of teachers in technical institutions and the consequent vacant positions therein, the age of superannuation for teachers in technical institutions has been enhanced to sixty five years, vide the Department of Higher Education letter No.F.No.1-19/2006-U.II dated 23.3.2007, for those involved in class room teaching in order to attract eligible persons to the teaching career and to retain teachers in service for a longer period.

(ii) Subject to availability of vacant positions and fitness, teachers shall also be reemployed on contract appointment beyond the age of sixty five years up to the age of seventy years. Re-employment beyond the age of superannuation shall, however, be done selectively, for a limited period of 3 years i.e. the first instance and then for another further period of 2 years purely on the basis of merit, experience, area of specialization and peer group review and only against available vacant positions without affecting selection or promotion prospects of eligible teachers.

(iii) Whereas the enhancement of the age of superannuation for teachers engaged in class room teaching is intended to attract eligible persons to a career in teaching and to meet the shortage of teachers by retaining teachers in service for a longer period, and whereas there is no shortage in the categories of Librarians, the increase in the age of superannuation from the present sixty two years shall not be available to the categories of Librarians.

It is not in dispute that the Regulations dated 5.3.2010 has been made effective by the State Government w.e.f, 19/10/2010. This aspect is borne out from the decision by a Division Bench of this court in W.A.No,1087/2012 and W.A.No.1088/2010 decided on 29.10.2012 wherein it is held:

"In this case, it was not disputed that the appellants were superannuated on 31/08/2010. The Regulation was notified on 05/03/2010 by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE). The State Government have given effect to the aforesaid notification, in particularly in respect of the age of superannuation, vide order dated 19/10/2010 (Annexure R-1) and the aforesaid Regulation was made applicable to all the Teachers who were working on the date of issuance of order i.e. on 19/10/2010.

The relevant paragraph of the Regulation dated 05/03/2010 about the age of superannuation, reads thus:-

Age of Superannuation:-

(i) In order to meet the situation arising out of the shortage of teachers in Technical Institutions and the consequent vacant positions therein, the age of superannuation for teachers in Technical Institutions has been enhanced to sixty five years, vide the Department of Higher Education letter No. F.No. 1-19/2006-U.II dated 23/03/2007, for those involved in class room teaching in order to attract eligible persons to the teaching career and to retain teachers in service for a longer period.

The applicability of the scheme clause reads thus:-

Applicability of the Scheme:-

(i) This scheme shall be applicable to teachers in Technical Institutions and other equivalent cadres of Library and for Physical Education personnel in all the AICTE approved institutions. The implementation of the revised scales shall be subject to the acceptance of all the conditions mention in this letter as well as Regulations to be framed by the AICTE in this behalf.

(ii) This scheme does not extend to the posts of professionals like System Analysis, Senior Analysis, Research Officers etc., who shall be treated at par with similarly qualified personnel in research/Scientific organizations of the Central Government.

(iii) This scheme may be extended to all Polytechnic Technical Institutions coming under the purview of State Legislatures. (iv) The entire liability on account of revision of pay scales etc. of Polytechnic teachers shall be that of the State Government.

State Government, taking into consideration other local conditions, may also decide in their discretion, to introduce scales of pay higher than those mentioned in this scheme, and may give effect to the revised bands /scales of pay from a date on or after 01/01/2006. However, appropriate steps to achieve the goals and objectives of MHRD''s "Sub-Mission on polytechnics" may be taken.

As the hindi version of the aforesaid notification has been referred by the learned counsel for the appellants, so the aforesaid provision is also reproduced which reads thus:-

From perusal of the aforesaid, it is apparent that the hindi version of the scheme provides that the scheme shall be applicable to all the Polytechnic Institutions which are under the State Government. The English version of the aforesaid clause specifically provides that the scheme may be extended to all the Polytechnic Technical Institutions coming under the purview of State legislatures. If there is some ambiguity between the hindi version and english version, the english version has to be given effect. [See: M/s. Park Leather Industry (P) Ltd. and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Others, and Prabhat Kumar Sharma Vs. U.P.S.C. and Others, . The english version of this Regulation provides that the scheme was to be extended to all the Polytechnic Technical Institutions coming under the purview of State legislatures. The State Government vide notification (Annexure R-1) dated 19/10/2010 has given effect to the aforesaid scheme from the date of issuance of notification that is 19/10/2010 and any teacher who was in service on that date was entitled for the benefit of such scheme and was entitled to continue till attaining the age of 65 years.

There being no cavil as to the applicability of Regulation 2010 to the Institution where the petitioner is engaged as Technical Assistant, the post which has been declared to be a teaching post since 1986, the petitioner would be entitled for the benefit of enhanced age of retirement of 65 years.

Consequently, order dated 8.2.2011 retiring the petitioner on superannuation at the age of 62 years is quashed. The petitioner by virtue of interim order has continued to work shall be entitled for all consequential benefit as a regular incumbent till he attains the age of 65 years.

Petition is allowed to the extent above. No costs.