Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Dr. Murtaza Ali Saloda vs State Of Rajasthan on 24 February, 2023
Bench: Vijay Bishnoi, Yogendra Kumar Purohit
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3106/2023
Dr. Murtaza Ali Saloda, Aged About 59 Years, Professor (C.a.s.)
Presently Working As Mechanical Engineer, C.t.a.e. Udaipur R/o
37, Imperial Dairy Taya Estates, Saheli Marg, Udaipur,
Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Higher Education,
Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. Maharana Pratap University Of Agriculture And
Technology, Through Registrar, Udaipur.
3. The College Of Technology And Engineering, Udaipur
(Ctae), Through Its Dean.
4. Secretary To The Hon'ble Chancellor, Raj Bhawan, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Dr. Murtaza Ali Saloda, petitioner,
present in person
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vishal Ajmera (through VC)
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT
Judgment / Order
24/02/2023
This writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the
validity of Rule 56 of the Maharana Pratap University of
Agriculture and Technology Udaipur, Teachers and Officer
Service Conditions and Conduct Rules, 2000, which provides
age of superannuation of faculty with regard to technical
(2 of 3) [CW-3106/2023]
education of Maharana Pratap University of Agriculture and
Technology as 60 years.
The petitioner, present in person, has argued that the
said condition of prescribing superannuation age of faculty
with regard to technical education as 60 years is in
contravention of All India Council for Technical Education Act,
1987 and All India Council for Technical Education Regulations
2010 and 2019. It is argued that the age of retirement of
teachers imparting technical education is governed by All
India Council for Technical Education Regulation, 2019.
The petitioner has also submitted that in a similar
controversy raised in DBCWP No.932/2023, whereby a similar
provision i.e. Section 31 of the M.B.M. University Act, 2021 is
under challenge, this Court while issuing notices to the
respondents has restrained the University from
superannuating its faculty member on attaining age of 60
years.
Mr. Vishal Ajmera has put in appearance on behalf of
respondent No.2 through video conferencing, claiming himself
to be the Officer-in-Charge in this case.
It is noticed that no caveat is filed on behalf of the
respondent-university, however, Mr. Ajmera is putting
appearance on behalf of it.
Mr. Ajmera, while placing reliance on an order dated 2 nd
August, 2010 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in D.B.
(3 of 3) [CW-3106/2023]
Civil Special Appeal (W) Nos.477/2010 and 478/2010, has
argued that this Court has already rejected the challenge of
this effect.
The copy of order dated 2nd August, 2010 passed in D.B.
Civil Special Appeal (W) Nos.477/2010 and 478/2010 has not
been supplied to us.
Having heard the petitioner (present in person) and
Mr. Vishal Ajmera (through VC), we deem it appropriate to
issue notice to the respondents. Since Mr. Ajmera is
appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 - Maharana Pratap
University of Agriculture and Technology, Udaipur, notice need
not be issued to it.
Let notice be issued to the respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4
only, returnable on 13.3.2023.
In the meantime, the respondent-university is restrained
from superannuating the petitioner from the post of
Professor, Mechanical Engineering Department, College of
Technology and Engineering on attaining the age of 60 years
till the next date of hearing.
List on 13.3.2023.
(YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT),J (VIJAY BISHNOI),J
106-msrathore/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
