HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH AFR Court No. - 10 Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 3664 of 2015 Petitioner :- Umesh Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.Secondary Education & 5 Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Manish Singh Chauhan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.
The petitioner claims to be working as Assistant Teacher in Intermediate College. He is seeking entitlement to continue in service till the end of academic session, based on the amended Regulation 15 of Chapter-I and Regulation 21 of Chapter-III of the Regulations made under U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921.
The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the date of birth of the petitioner is 26.1.1953. The age of superannuation under Regulation 21 being 62 years, he has attained the age of superannuation on 26.1.2015. However, in view of the earlier existing Regulation 21, the petitioner has been allowed to continue till the end of academic session i.e. 30.6.2015. Now in view of amended Regulations 15 and 21 vide notification dated 15.10.2014 and 12.6.2015, the definition of academic session has been changed instead of commencing from 1st July and ending on 30th June next thereafter, the academic session now commences from 1st April and ends on 31st March next. Therefore, the ensuing retirement of the petitioner on 30th June falls in mid academic session as per the amended Regulations and the petitioner is entitled to continue till 31st March, 2016. In this regard, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgment of this Court dated 16.6.2015 passed in Writ Petition No.3433 (SS) of 2015 (Krishna Kumar Dwivedi vs. State of U.P.). He has also placed reliance upon the decision of the Supreme Court reported in (2012) 7 SCC 1, Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Ltd. vs. Rajesh Kumar and others, specially Para-19 thereof, to submit that this Court is bound to follow the aforesaid judgment passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court and cannot take another view in the matter.
On a perusal of the judgment dated 16.6.2015, I find that there is no mention about the date of birth of the petitioner therein. The said judgment merely lays down the proposition that if a teacher is going to retire between 2nd April, 2015 to 31st March, 2016, he is entitled to continue in service till 31st March, 2016 in terms of Regulation 21 of the Regulations made under Chapter III of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. Based thereon, this Court has issued a direction that the State Government/competent authority is at liberty to verify the date of retirement of all the teachers individually. After verification of date of birth, if the petitioner is found to be retired between 2nd April, 2015 and 31st March, 2016 his services would be permitted to be continued till the end of academic session i.e. 31st March, 2016.
There can be no dispute about the proposition of law mentioned in the said judgment. Each case stands on its own footing. Indisputably, the amended Regulation 21 reads as under:
orZZeku Lo:i la'kksf/kr Lo:i fofu;e&21 vkpk;Z] iz/kkuk/;kid] v/;kid rFkk vU; deZpkfj;ksa dk vf/ko"kZ o; 02 tqykbZ ,oa 30 twu ds e/; esa fdlh frfFk dks iMrk gS] rks mls] ml n'kk dks NksMdj tcfd og Lo;a lsok foLrj.k u ysus gsrq fyf[kr lwpuk vius vf/ko"k o; dh frfFk ls 02 ekg iwoZ ns ns] 30 twu rd lsok foLrj.k Lo;aeso iznku fd;k le>k tk;sxk] rkfd xzh"ekodk'k ds mijkUr tqykbZ esa izfrLFkkuh dh O;oLFkk gks ldsA blds vfrfjDr lsok foLrj.k dsoy mUgha fof'k"V n'kkvksa esa iznku fd;k tk ldsxk] tks jkT; ljdkj }kjk fu/kkZfjr dh tk;A ;fn fdlh fyfid vFkok prqFkZ oxhZ; deZpkfj;ksa ds vf/ko"kZ o; dh frfFk fdlh ekg ds e/; fdlh frfFk dks iMrh gS rks mldk lsok foLrj.k ml ekl dh vfUre frfFk rd iznku fd;k x;k le>k tk;sxk] fdUrq ;fn fdlh deZpkjh dh lsokfuo`fr dh frfFk fdlh ekg dh igyh rkjh[k dks iMs rks mls iwoZorhZ ekg dh vfUre frfFk dks lsokfuo`Rr dj fn;k tk;sxkA fofu;e&21 vkpk;Z] iz/kkuk/;kid] v/;kid rFkk vU; deZpkfj;ksa dk vf/ko"kZ o; 02 vizSy ,oa 31 ekpZ ds e/; esa fdlh frfFk dks iMrk gS] rks mls] ml n'kk dks NksMdj tcfd og Lo;a lsok foLrj.k u ysus gsrq fyf[kr lwpuk vius vf/ko"k o; dh frfFk ls 02 ekg iwoZ ns ns] 31 ekpZ rd lsok foLrj.k Lo;aeso iznku fd;k le>k tk;sxk] rkfd xzh"ekodk'k ds iwoZ vizSy ekg esa izfrLFkkuh dh O;oLFkk gks ldsA blds vfrfjDr lsok foLrj.k dsoy mUgha fof'k"V n'kkvksa esa iznku fd;k tk ldsxk] tks jkT; ljdkj }kjk fu/kkZfjr dh tk;A ;fn fdlh fyfid vFkok prqFkZ oxhZ; deZpkfj;ksa ds vf/ko"kZ o; dh frfFk fdlh ekg ds e/; fdlh frfFk dks iMrh gS rks mldk lsok foLrj.k ml ekl dh vfUre frfFk rd iznku fd;k x;k le>k tk;sxk] fdUrq ;fn fdlh deZpkjh dh lsokfuo`fr dh frfFk fdlh ekg dh igyh rkjh[k dks iMs rks mls iwoZorhZ ekg dh vfUre frfFk dks lsokfuo`Rr dj fn;k tk;sxkA According to the said regulation, if the date of retirement/superannuation of a teacher or Headmaster falls between 2nd April, 2015 and 31st March, 2016, then unless the said teacher himself declines to accept the continuance in service, he shall be entitled to continue till the end of academic session i.e. 31st March, 2016 and this benefit shall stand conferred on him suo-motu i.e. automatically.
In Para-7 of the writ petition, the petitioner has categorically mentioned his date of birth as 26.1.1953 and as per Regulation 21, the age of superannuation of a teacher governed by the Act of 1921 is 62 years, it being so, the petitioner herein attained the age of superannuation/retirement and his date of superannuation/retirement fell on 30.6.2015. In normal course, the petitioner would have retired, but he was allowed to continue in service as per the then existing Regulation 21 till the end of academic session i.e. 30.6.2015. This does not mean that the petitioner will retire on 30.6.2015 nor that he is entitled to continue in service till 31.3.2016 in view of the amended regulations. The date of his retirement remains unchanged and it fell on 26.1.2015. He has merely continued in service till 30.6.2015 in view of the unamended Regulation 21 and his date of retirement (26.1.2015) fell in mid academic session as per the unamended definition contained in Regulation 15. Such continuance of service till the end of academic session is available only once under Regulation 21 and the same having been availed, it cannot be claimed again in the garb of amendment in Regulations 15 and 21 as referred earlier. The judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner does not lay down any proposition of law to the contrary.
It is also pertinent to mention that in similar circumstances, a learned Single Judge of this Court dismissed a similar writ petition vide judgment and order dated 22.5.2015 passed in Writ Petition No.2735 (SS) of 2015. On being challenged in appeal, the same was affirmed by the Division Bench vide order dated 9.6.2015 in Special Appeal No.227 of 2015.
As the amendment in Regulations 15 and 21 vide notification dated 15.10.2014 and 12.6.2015 is effective from the new academic session commencing from 1st April, 2015 therefore, no benefit of the said provisions can be given to the petitioner, who had already attained the age of retirement prior to it. He at best was entitled to continue till 30.6.2015, but not beyond that.
With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 30.6.2015 Sachin