IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/B) No. 143 of 2010 Jagpal Singh ……… Petitioner. Versus State of Uttarakhand and others .………. Respondents. Mr. Ravi Babulkar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J.P. Joshi, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Date of Judgment: 28.07.2010 JUDGMENT Coram: Hon’ble J.S. Khehar, C.J. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. J.S. KHEHAR, C. J. (Oral) Notice to the respondents. 2. Mr. J.P. Joshi, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3. 3. The petitioner was awarded the National Award for Teachers, granted as an annual feature by the Ministry of Human Resource Development in 1997. On account of the aforesaid excellence in performance of his duties, even though the petitioner was to retire on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.07.2008, he was granted an extension for a period of two years, i.e., upto 31.07.2010. At the end of the current month, the petitioner shall be relieved from his duties after availing of the benefit of the aforesaid extension. 4. The issue which has been brought to our notice is based on a Government Order dated 30.11.2007 (Annexure 3), whereby a teacher retiring mid-session is permitted to continue till the end of the academic session so as to ensure, that the students of the institution do not suffer on account of the retirement of a teacher prior to the expiry of the academic session. The petitioner has approached this Court so as to be permitted to continue till the end of the academic session, 2010-11. The consideration is on the basis of the fact, that he will be relieved from service at the end of the current month, i.e., with effect from 31.07.2010. Stricto sensu, the 2 Government Order dated 30.11.2007, if read technically, by giving effect to the words expressed therein, may not be applicable to the petitioner, since the extension till the end of the academic session is only limited to those who are to retire on attaining the age of superannuation. Since the petitioner attained the age of superannuation on 31.07.2008, the Government Order dated 30.11.2007 may not appear to be applicable to the petitioner. We are, however, satisfied, that the aforesaid Government Order must be applied to the case of the petitioner as well, on account of the policy envisaged in the Government Order dated 30.11.2007, namely, that students enrolled in an institution do not suffer on account of a teacher having to relinquish charge mid-stream of an academic session. Read in the right perspective, the aforesaid Government Order is not for the benefit of the employee concerned, but the students he is teaching in the current academic session. The policy envisaged in the Government Order dated 30.11.2007 must, therefore, be necessarily applied to the petitioner’s case as well, in view of the fact, that he has to relinquish charge mid-session, but it has to be for the welfare of the students. 5. In spite of our determination hereinabove, it is for the competent authority, to take into consideration the claim of the petitioner, and to determine whether his relinquishing charge mid-stream the academic session would have an adverse effect on the students enrolled in the institution where he is presently posted. If the answer to the aforesaid query is in affirmative, the petitioner must necessarily be allowed to continue till the end of the academic session. 6. In view of the above, we consider it just and appropriate to direct the competent authority to take a decision in connection with the continuation of the petitioner till the end of the academic session. The aforesaid decision shall positively be taken before 31.07.2010, i.e., the date when the petitioner is to relinquish his charge. However, if for some reason the competent authority cannot take a decision in the matter within the time stipulated hereinabove, the petitioner shall be allowed to continue in service till such a decision is taken. 3 7. The instant writ petition stands dispose of in the aforesaid terms. 8. A copy of the instant order be furnished to the learned counsel for the respondents within 24 hours under the signatures of the Bench Secretary attached to this Court for compliance and implementation. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) (J.S. Khehar, C. J.) 28.07.2010 28.07.2010 Amit