IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.789 of 2008 1. B.R.Ambedkar Bihar University Senior Teachers Association, University Campus Muzaffarpur through its President Dr. Sachindra Kumar Singh Son of late Bishwanath Prasad resident of village Lachhiminia P.O. Rupauli Jiwachpur, Police Station Gamharia District Madhepura. 2. Dr. Sachindra Kumar Singh Son of late Bishwanath Prasad Singh resident of village Lachhiminia P.O. Rupauli Jiwachpur, Police Station Gamharia, District Madhepura. 3. Dr. Radha Raman Singh Son of late Indradeo Singh resident of village Dibbi, P.O. Merhi Police Station Mazaharul Haque Nagar, District Siwan. 4. Dr. Mukul Bandopadhyay daughter of late S. N. Banarjee resident of Mohalla Durgapur, P.O. & P.S. Durgapur, District Durgapur (West Bengal). 5. Dr. Parwati Singh daughter of late Ambika Prasad Singh, resident of Mohalla Damuochak, P.S. Muzaffarpur Sadar, District Muzaffarpur. 6. Dr. Shambhu Nath Kumar Son of late Deo Kumar resident of village & P.O. Baisi via Karjain Bazar, P.S. Supaul district Supaul. 7. Dr. Shashi Ranjan Prasad Sinha son of Late Lala Nagendra Prasad resident of Mohalla Balam Babu Lane, East of overbridge Maripur, Muzaffarpur. Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Principal Secretary of Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Chancellor of Universities of Bihar (B.R. Ambedkar Bihar University), Raj Bhawan, Patna. 4. The B. R. Ambedkar Bihar University Muzaffarpur through its Registrar. 5. The Vice Chancellor, B. R. Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur. 6. The Registrar, B.R. Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur. 7. The Union of India through its Secretary, Ministry of Human Resources Development 2 Department, Department of Higher Education, Government of India, New Delhi. 8. The University Grants Commission through its Secretary Bahadur Sah Zafar Marg, New Delhi. 9. The Chairman, University Grants Commission, Bahadur Sah Zafar Marg, New Delhi. 10. The Secretary University Grants Commission, Bahadur Sah Zafar Marg, New Delhi. 11. Dr. Lal Bahadur Prasad Son of Late Jamadar Prasad resident of Mohalla Bettiah, P.O. & P.S. Bettiah District West Champaran (Bettiah) 12. Dr.Ram Dinesh Prasad Sharma son of Ram Bahadur Singh resident of village Majhaulia, P.O. Khabra, P.S. Kazi Muhammadpur, District Muzaffarpur 13. Naimuddin Ali Son of Late Hazi Mohammad Alijan resident of village Khurseda, P.O. Kurnow, P.S. Sahebganj, District Muzaffarpur. ----------- For the Appellants : M/S. Binoda Nand Mishra & Kripa Nand Jha For the Respondent nos. 1 & 2: Mr. Shailendra Kumar Jha.J.C. to S.C. IX For the Respondent nos. 4 to 6: Mr. Ajay Behari Sinha. For the Respondent no. 7 : Mr. Kameshwar Kumar For the Respondent nos. 8 to 10 : Mr. Pushkar Narain Shahi. ------------ P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal ------------ Dated, the 21st October, 2008. Based on two letters dated 23rd March, 2007 and 4th April, 2007, the appellants who are unsuccessful petitioners, preferred a writ petition before this Court that their age of superannuation being enhanced from 62 years to 65 years, a direction be issued to the respondents accordingly. 2. The Single Judge was not persuaded by the 3 submissions of the petitioners and dismissed the writ petition and, hence, the appeal. 3. The letter dated 23rd March, 2007 reads thus : “ Government of India Ministry of Human Resources Development Department of Higher Education. New Delhi, the 23rd March, 2007. The Secretary, University Grant Commission, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi Subject : Enhancement in the age of superannuation from 62 to 65 years for teaching position in centrally funded institution in higher and technical education. Sir, I am directed to say that at the time of revision of pay scales of teachers in universities and colleges, following the revision of pay scales of Central Government employees on the recommendations of the fifth Central Pay Commission, it was provided inter alia, in this Ministry’s letter no. 1-22/97-U-I dated 27th July, 1998 that “the age of superannuation of University and College teachers would be 62 years and thereafter no extension in service should be given. However, it will be open to a university or College to re-employ a superannuated teacher according to the existing guidelines framed by the UGC up to the age of 65 years.” 2.The matter has been reviewed by the Central Government in the light of the existing shortage in teaching positions in the Centrally funded institutions in higher and technical education under this Ministry, and in the context of Government’s decision to expand the capacities of such Institutions for increasing access to higher education and for implementing the policy of reservations for the weaker sections without affecting the number of seats in the unreserved category available through general merit. Accordingly, it has been decided that – (i) The age of Superannuation of all persons who were holding position on regular employment against sanctioned posts as on 15.3.2007 in any of the centrally funded higher and technical education under the Ministry shall be increased from present 62 years to 65 years. 4 (ii) Persons holding such regular teaching positions who have superannuated prior to 15.3.2007 on attaining the age of 62 years but have not attained the age of 65 years may be re-employed against vacant sanctioned teaching positions till they attain the age of 65 years, in accordance with the guidelines framed by the University Grants Commission. (iii) All persons holding teaching positions against sanctioned posts may also be considered for re- employment beyond 65 years and up to the age of 70 years, against sanctioned vacant posts, if such posts are not filled up by regular candidates. However, such re- employments beyond the age of 65 years shall be done only after screening at the age of 65 years under the extant guidelines of the University Grants Commission. 3. It is further clarified hat the enhancement of retirement age as mentioned above and the provision for re-employment will apply only to persons in teaching positions against posts sanctioned to Centrally funded higher and technical education institutions coming under the purview of this Ministry, in order to overcome the shortage of teachers. 4. Necessary Notification in this regard may be issued by the University Grants Commission. Yours faithfully Sd/ R. Chakravarty Deputy Secretary to the Government of India.” 4. Consequent upon the said letter, the University Grants Commission sent its letter on 4th April, 2007 to the Registrar of All Central/Deemed Universities enclosing a copy of the letter dated 23rd March, 2007 received from the Ministry of Human Resources Development Department of High Education regarding enhancement in the age of superannuation from 62 to 65 years for teaching positions in centrally funded institutions in higher and technical education for compliance. 5. Section 67 of the Bihar Universities Act, as existing presently, reads thus : 5 “ Retirement from service – (a) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any Act, Rules or any judgment or decree of a Court, the date of retirement of a teaching employee of the University or of a College shall be the date on which he attains the age of sixty years. The date of retirement of non-teaching employee (other than the inferior servants) shall be the date on which he attains the age of sixty years. Provided that the date of retirement of such non-teaching employee, who is in the service of the University prior to the commencement of the Bihar State Universities Act, 1976 (Bihar Act 23, 1976) shall be the date on which he attains the age of sixty-two years. Provided further that the University shall, in no case, extend the period of service of any of the teaching or non-teaching employee after he attains the age of sixty or sixty-two years, as the case may be. Provided further also that re-appointment of teachers after retirement may be made in appropriate cases up to the age of sixty-five years in the manner laid down in the Statutes made in this behalf in accordance with the guidelines of the University Grants Commission. (b) The University may require any teaching or non-teaching employee, who, reckoned from the date of his first appointment, has completed the qualifying Service of 23 years or a total service of 27 years, to retire from the University Service, if it considers that his conduct or efficiency is such as does not justify his continuation in the service. (c) (i) Notwithstanding anything contained in the preceding sub-section, any teaching or non- teaching employee may, after giving at least three months prior notice in writing to the concerned appointing authority, retire from such date on which such a teaching or non-teaching employee has completed 32 years of qualifying service or has attained 52 years of age or from such date thereafter as may be specified in the notice. Provided that no employee of the University under orders of suspension shall retire except without a specific approval of the Syndicate. (ii) The University may, in the public interest, require any teaching or non-teaching employee, after giving at least three months prior notice in writing or after paying an amount equivalent to pay and allowance of three months in lieu of such notice, to retire from such date on which he completes 32 years of 6 qualifying service or attains 52 years of age, or from such date thereafter as may be specified in the notice. (d) The provisions contained in the preceding sub-sections shall mutatis mutandis apply to the teaching and non-teaching employees of affiliated Colleges.” 6. For the purpose of the present case, the relevant provision is clause (a) of section 67 of the Bihar State Universities Act, 1976 which provides that the date of retirement of a teaching employee of the University or of a College shall be the date on which he attains the age of sixty two years. It further provides that the date of retirement of all teaching employees will be the same which would be decided by the University Grants Commission in future. 7. That the University Grants Commission has not taken any decision with regard to the Universities of Bihar which are not centrally funded is apparent from the letters dated 23rd March, 2007 and 4th April, 2007 which are unambiguous in terms that enhancement of retirement age from 62 to 65 years is only applicable to the persons in teaching positions against posts sanctioned to centrally funded higher and technical education institutions coming under the purview of the Ministry of Higher Education in order to overcome the shortage of teachers. The decision of the enhancement of retirement age from 62 to 65 years by the University Grants Commission is, thus, confined only to those teaching employees holding teaching position against sanctioned posts in centrally funded higher and technical education Institutions and not to other 7 Universities. This is further clarified by the University Grants Commission itself in its counter affidavit. In paragraphs 11 and 12 of its counter affidavit, the University Grants Commission stated before this Court thus : “11. That it is respectfully submitted that it is apparent from reading of the aforesaid letter dated 23.03.2007 of the Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India, that the enhancement in the age of superannuation from 62 to 65 years for teaching positions is applicable in respect of only centrally funded institutions in higher and technical education. 12. That in the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is respectfully submitted that the University Grants Commission has not framed any Regulation specifying the age of superannuation of the teachers in the State Universities and the Colleges affiliated thereto. In the circumstances, it is open to the State Government to specify the 60 year or 62 year or 65 year or any other age as the age of superannuation of the teachers in the State Universities and the colleges affiliated thereto.” 8. There cannot be more clarity in the stand of the University Grants Commission that the enhancement in the age of superannuation from 62 to 65 years for teaching positions is applicable in respect of only centrally funded institutions in higher and technical education and that the University Grants Commission has not framed any Regulation specifying the age of superannuation of the teachers in the State Universities and the Colleges affiliated thereto. 9. In view of the categorical and unambiguous stand of the University Grants Commission before this Court, the view of the 8 Single Judge cannot be faulted. 10. Before we close, we may notice that the counsel for the appellants cited few decisions. However, we do not deem it necessary to refer them as they are not relevant at all for consideration of the matter. 11. Letters Patent Appeal is dismissed in limine. R. M. Lodha, C.J., Kishore K. Mandal, J. AMIN/