IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP (T) No. 6429 of 2008 (OA No. 360 of 1999) Date of decision: 8.9.2010 D.D.Sharma .. Petitioner. Vs. State of H.P. and others …. Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranjan Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K.Sharma, Sr. Additional Advocate General, for respondents No. 1 & 2. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition is filed with the following reliefs:- “(i) That the respondents may be directed to give the pay and allowances to the applicant in the revised pay scales of that of a Principal of Rs. 13500-16800 w.e.f. 1.1.1996 till 30.6.1997 forthwith. (ii) That the respondents may be directed to give the salary to the applicant in the unrevised scale of Rs.3700-5700 for the period w.e.f. April 1996 to 30.6.1997, alternatively forthwith. (iii) That in case of relief(s) (i) and (ii) are not admissible then, the respondents may be directed to give the salary for the period w.e.f. April 1996 to 30.6.1997 @ Rs.4000/- per month forthwith.” 2 2. In the reply furnished by the Director, the stand taken is as follows:- “3. That it is respectfully submitted that Maharaja Sansar Chand Memorial College, Thural, District Kangra was born on list of adhoc grant and brought on the list of 95% Grand-in- aided Colleges. Be it stated that the Govt. of Himachal Pradesh has notified the rules for the proper functioning, managing and controlling the day to day affairs of Non-Government Affiliated Colleges namely as “The Himachal Pradesh Non-Government Affiliated Colleges Grand-in-aid Rules, 1994. These rules came into force w.e.f. 6.5.1994 i.e. from the date of notification. The Rule 24 of “The Himachal Pradesh Non-Govt. Affiliated Colleges Grant-in-aid Rules, 1994” stipulate as:- Age at the Time of Enrolment in Private Colleges The maximum age for joining the service as Principal and Lecturers shall be upto 58 years and upto 45 years respectively. The retirement age shall not exceed 60 years of age for all services. 4. That the applicant attained the age of superannuation on 14.9.1993 and in view of the provisions of Rule 24 as submitted in para 3 supra was not entitled to continue in the service of College after 30.9.1993. The Management of the College did not comply with the provisions contained in Rule 24 of (The Himachal Pradesh Non Govt. affiliated Colleges) Grant-in-Aid Rules, 1994 and allowed the applicant to continue in service even after attaining the age of superannuation i.e. after 30.9.1993. So much so, Management retained the applicant uptil September, 1996 at their risk and peril. The applicant continued to function as Drawing and Disbursing Officers of the College because of the omission and commission of Respondent No.3. The Respondent No.3 remained slumbered 3 over the issue for years together which smacks of connivance and hidden agenda to given undue favour to the applicant. This fact came to the notice of the Department when the Section Officer (Audit) posted in the District Education Office, Dharamshala conducted the enquiry and submitted the report. Thereafter, DDO powers delegated to the applicant were withdrawn vide order dated October 8, 1995.” 3. It is the contention of the petitioner that the re-employment of a retired employee is permissible under the relevant instructions. It is also submitted that the petitioner had been granted salary w.e.f. April 1995 to April, 1996 under the Grant-in-Aid Rules only and therefore, until he actually continued in the service of the 3rd respondent, he should have been continued with the salary under the Grant-in-Aid Rules. It is also brought to our notice that Annexure A-2 is pending with the Registrar of the University under the University Statutes, in the matter of request for extension of employment. 4 Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Additional Advocate General, it is fairly clear that the representation of the petitioner must be considered by the 1st respondent. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of as follows:- The petitioner may file an appropriate representation, detailing his grievances in the light of the reply furnished by the Director, before the 1st respondent within a period of one month from today. The matter will be examined by the 1st respondent with notice to the petitioner within another four months. In the process Annexure A-2 shall also be taken into consideration. The orders, thus, passed shall also be communicated to the petitioner. 4 Needless to say that in case the petitioner is found eligible for any benefit, the same shall also be disbursed to the petitioner within another one month. Copy dasti. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice . September 8, 2010 (Justice Kuldip Singh), (GR/Pankaj) Judge.