IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 1933 of 2008. Date of decision:- 07.01.2009. Jai Singh ...Petitioner. Versus National Institute of Technology, Kurukshetra and another ...Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI Present:- Mr. Adarsh Jain, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. A.S. Virk, Advocate for the respondents. AJAY TEWARI J. The petitioner had retired on 28.02.2007. Thereafter, on 23.03.2007 the Government of India issued instructions increasing retirement age of Centrally funded technical institutions from 62 to 65 and further laid down that those persons who had retired before 15.03.2007 but had not attained the age of 65 years, would be offered re-employment. The petitioner claimed re-employment but was turned down resulting in filing of this writ petition. In the written statement, it is stated that in that interregnum the entire faculty of respondent No.1 Institution was restructured by the Government of India and against the originally sanctioned seven posts in the Department of Maths, at present there are only five posts. In these circumstances, there is no requirement for the services of the petitioner and that thus no fault can be found in not acceding to the request of the petitioner for re-employment. In view of these facts, in my opinion the petitioner cannot C.W.P. No. 1933 of 2008 -2- insist on re-employment. Had the original sanctioned strength continued, no doubt the petitioner would have an indefeasible claim but now that the strength has been decreased by more than twenty percent, the petitioner cannot claim to be re-employed. Consequently, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. 07th January, 2009 (AJAY TEWARI) vj JUDGE