J 67 1 r4 b 1 1N THE HlGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARHe a CWP No665 of2010 Date ofdecisionl 43011 Prof SSBindra and others Petitioners Vs The StateofPunjaband others Respondents And connected petitionsbeingCWP N001392of 2009 CWP Nose1268 1297 1324 1932 2661 3803 4583 to 4585 4607 4617 7176 7321 8823 9465 9773 106161107611972 1260312604127361288213117142651427714604 14693150011544715463155081562415880 16185162231635716961 17140171551716317400175451883719087191521925619501 18508 1857519596 19693 19699 19749 19841 19908 19935 20036 20225 20226 0 20296 to 20298 20422 206 20693 20728 20729 10750 20854 21135 to C0 21137 21159 21240 21241 22449 22673 22736 22818 and 23003 of 2010 I AND 0 Z CWP N0se184 345 585 838 896 897 1001 1304 1386 1429 1495 1618 1782 2065 3391 3464 0 3492of2011 Z 1 CORAM2 HONBLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HONBLE MR JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL I Presenta Dr Balram GuptaSr Advocatewith Ms Anamika Negi Advocate n CWP Nos665 15463 15508 Z 15624 17545 19087 19256 21159 22818 of 2010 and 1495 8 a 34641201 m Mr BM SinghAdvocate and Mr Anshul Joy Advocate OinCWP Nos 7321 12882 14693 15001 W2 Z 20296to 20298 211368i 23003of2010 and 14298 3492 of201 19 CL Mr SarjitSinghSr Advocatewith Mr Vikas SinghAdvocate0nCWP No14265 and 19841of20101 Mr R Malik Sr Advocate with e Ms Komal Shanna Advocate In CWP Nos7176 8823 12603 to 12604158801696118837191520f2010 Mr Arun Nehra Advocate n CWP No63571109 A4r RD Anand AdvocateOinCWP Mr Padam Kant Dwivedi Advocate 6inCWP P e Batra Amit 2014.07.01 15: 24 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGNAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 1 nr CWP 165of 2010 0 Nl ManojChahal Advocate 6inCWP Nosl9501 21135 0 21240 8i Mr SS Salar Advocate n CWP No10616 20613 of 2010 184111 M Atul Kaushik 8 ManjitSingAAdvocates cinCWP No6731109 Ivlr AnupamAdvocate CinCWP Mr NS BhardwajAdvocate n CWP Mr AlC Bishnoi Advocate 1 CWP Mr Kewal Kumari AdvocateGnCWP Nos9465110 1304111 1 0 Mr SaurabhArora Advocate in CWP Nos21241110853391111 0 0 e SubhashAha Advocate 1 CWP Nol38611 1 I Mr Ashok SehgalAdvocate in CWP No8511 19 C5 I Mr SudhanshuMaklaw Advocate Z in CWP No3921099 5t Mrlllilesh BhardwajAdvocate GnCWP Nos932 20728 8 20729 7 of2010 I Mr K Tamak Advocate OinCWP Nos1324 11972 21137 and r 22736 of2010 Z c Mr SlC Arora Advocate 6inCWP Nos19935110c 896111 W3 Dr Surya Prakash Advocate n CWP Nos1268 2661 4583 to 4585 Z 4607 4617 and 19908of2010 for Qe Mr JaswinderSinghDAG Punjab Mr AnupamGuptaAdvocate for PanjabUniversity Mr SC Sibal Sr Advocate with Mr VS Rana Adv for KurukshetraUniversity Mr Amt Pal Advocate for Guru Nanak Dev University Mr NC Dahiya Advocate and Mr it Rao Adv for Mre SK Shanna Adv for UGC Batra Amit 2014.07.01 15: 24 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGNAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP 65 of 2010 4 4 9 0 br Mr AshwinieBansal CentralGovt Counsel MrsKamlaMalik CentralGovt Counsel I5 Mr Rajdeep S Cheema Advocate 11 for 11 8 12 in CWP Nol2736110 t Jt ll for 10 in CWP No131 17110 1 r 3 3 forrespondentNo7 in CWP No16185110 1r 41 forrespondent Nos 8e 10 in CWP No18575110 i forrespondent No6 in CWP No19749110 forrespondent NosS 8 6 in CWP N20036110 1 Mr HemenderGoswami Advocate CWPNo896111 Mr SC NagpalAdvocate m for 8 6 in CWP No321110 8 0 for in CWP No12882110 5 0 U Adarsh Kumar GoelJ Z 0 1e This order will of a bunch of 100petitions mentionedabove to leamed counsel for the all the writ petitionsinvolve 4r Z common relatingto claim of the writ petitionersfor revision of age of 54 3 retirementto 65 years The said claim is based on letter dated 31 2008 of the r of lndia addressed to the UniversityGrants Commission JGC9 0C followedby letterof the Govemment of India dated 113010 to the Education Z C Secretariesof all State Govemments and notification of UniversityGrants QO er Commission Minimum Qualificationsfor of teachers and other vao Z AcademicStaff in Universities and Collegesand other Measures for the Maintenanceofstandardsin HigherEducationl 2010 2 A bunch ofpetitionscame up for hearingbefore leamed SingleJudge who vide order dated 4 10201 0 referred the mauer to the Division Bench as follows 44 Since the Snal outcome of these cases is likely to have far reaching includingsome lmpacton other Stateservices Il w Batra Amit 2014.07.01 15: 24 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGNAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 70 CWP 65 of 2010 4 0 also it appears intermaliathat the followingimponantquestions of law needto be bya largerbenchle a9 Whether the service conditions includingthe age of retlrement prescribed in the sttory service rules 8amed under provisoto Article 309 ofthe Constiwtion or under a stamte can be deemed to have been amended by virtue of the CircularlScheine dated 3122008 issued bythe Government ofIndia2 b9Whether the Goveent of India is competentto cointnand the StateGovemmentsfUniversitiesto increasethe age of retirementof a sectionofthe i f 3 c9Whetherthe States haveany lawful authority to bargeinto theOeld 0 of Education when the subjectmatter is directlyreferableto Entry 0 66 ofList I Union List or Entry25 ofthe List III ConcurrentList I C9 only2 I d1 What will be the impactofthe GovemmentofIndia Schemeor the Z UGC in the case of teachersworkingin the inter state Universities like PanjabUniversityChandigarh7 0 er e What is the scope of Statutory powers of UGC and whether such I powerswould include the authorityto lay the I Z conditionsof service includingthe ageof retirement2 m 4 Admitted to DB Let therecordsofthese cases be placedbefore Honble the Chief Justice for eniistingthem before an Bench on ne Z 1512010 Om XX XXX XXX XXXXX Accordinglythe matters have been placedbefore this Bench Severalother Wrlt petitions filed aRer the order ofreference havealsobeen listed for hearing 3 CWP No9665 of 2010 has been treated to be the main petitionon suggestion of leamed counsel for the partiesand pleadings are beingrefened to om the said petitionCase of the petitionersis that they are teachingin different of Guru Nanak Dev UniversityGNDU Their ageIS ll r Batra Amit 2014.07.01 15: 24 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGNAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document cwp t71 35of 2010 4 rules TheGovent of India appointed Sixth Pay 0 60 years as per Commissionon 5102006 to consider the demand of the Central Govemment for increaseinsalaryand improvement of other serviceconditions The 2432008 which was approvedby the Union saidCommission gave its report on on 1482008 The UGC an expertcommittee to consider the claim of the in Universitiesand collegesfor revision of pay scles and otherallied issues by Prof GKChadha The Committeegave its repott 1 ofteachersand to attract eligiblescholars meetthe situationarisingout thestandardof qualityof highereducation 0 etotheteaching to improve 0 Thesaid Commiuee also recommended of retired teachersuptothe 32 0 ageof70 years Tl 4 Based OIl consideration of the saidreport the Govemmentof India Z 5 dated2332007 conveyed its decision to revise age of vide of a1l persons holding teacllingpositionas on 1532007to 65 years and also 31 The said age Z to Centrally61ndedhigherand technical educationinstitutions was m orderto overcome the shortage of coming under the purviewof this ministry111 4 z teachers Therealler vide letter dated 31122008 Annexure P3 scheme for ofpayscaleswas bytheMinistryof to theUGC Therein Ll issue of age ofsuperation also Sguredin para 8 The said para alongwith subparaO ofpara8 are belowl Other terms and conditions2 a9 to e9e X xx XX XX f9Ageof oinorder to meet the situation arisingout of shortageof in universitiesand other teachinginstitutionsand V Batra Amit 2014.07.01 15: 24 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGNAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWPK7235 of 2010 4 vacant positionstherein the age of the 0 for teachers in Central Educational has alreadybeen enhancedto sixtyflve yearsvide the depnt of highereducation letter NoNo 1 e 1912006UI dated 23 2007 for those involved in class room teachinglll orderto attract eligiblepersons to the career and to retain teachersin service for a longer period Consequenton UpwardreVlS1011 of the age of superation of teachersthe Central Govemment has rized the Central Universitiesvide department of highereducation DO letter NoF2412006 Desk 1r dated 3032007 to enhancethe age of of Vicechancellorsof CentralUniversities from 65 yearsto 70 0 0 to amendmentsin the respective statutes with years 32 the of the competentauthority lisitor in the case C5 of Central ii9subjectto availabilityof vacant p6sitionsand fitness Z teachers shall also be re on contract appolntment the age of sixtyflve years uptothe age of seventy beyondthe age of years I shallhowever be done selectively for a limited periodof t Z three years in the first instanceand then for anotherfurther of two years purelyon the basis of merit expenence 00 area of merit experience area of and peer m5 reviewand only againstavailable vacant posittons Z group without selection or Of 0m eligible teachers the enhancementof the age of for teachers engaged111 class room teachingis intended to attracteligiblepersonsto a career lll teachingand to meet theshortageofteachersby retainingteachers in service for a longerperiodand whereas there is no shonagein the of librariansand Directors of PhysicalEducation the increase lll theage of from the present Batra Amit 2014.07.01 15: 24 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGNAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 73 CWPD 55of 2010 shallnot be availableto the of sixty two years t and Directors ofPhYSiCal EdUCatO XX XXX XXX xx xx p1Applicabilityof the Scheme i1This scheme shall be applicableto teachers and other cadres of Library and PhysicalEducation in all the Central and collegesthereunder and the deemed to be universities whose expenditureis met by the UGC The ofthe revisedscales shall be subject to the 1 C of all lhe conditionsmotionedin this letter as as to be framedby the UGC in this behalf 0 well 0 Universities this schemeshall be advisedby lr the UGCto amendtheir relevant statutesand ordinancesin C9 linewith the UGC to amend their relevant statutes and I in line with the UGC Regulationswithin three Z rnonths 8om thedateofissue ofthis letter Ct iil to ivl Y A5Y Xx xx I v This schememay be eended to universities colleges Cl and other educationalinstimtionscomingunder the Z of StateLegisl providedState Governments QO wish to adoptand implementthe scheme subjectto the 7 following terms andconditions Z alFinanceassistancefrom the CentralGovemmentto State Govents optingto revisepay scalesof teachers and other cadre covered under the Scheme shallbe limited to the extent of 80Io eightypercentlof the additional involved lll the ofthe revision b9The state Goveent optingfor revision of pay shall meet the remaining200Io venty percen of the additional from its own sources J V Batra Amit 2014.07.01 15: 24 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGNAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 74 CWPI 65of 2010 0 c1to 0 xx Xx XXX XXX XXX r g1Paymentof central assistancefor implementing this schemeis also subjecto the condition that the entire scheme of revision of pay scales togetherwith all the conditionsto be laid down by the UGC by way of andher guidelines shall be implemented by State Governments and universities and colleges coming under 8oeirjurisdiction asa compositescheme withoutany modificationexceptin regardto the date of and scales of pay mentioned herein above supplied9 0 2 5 The UGC vide letter d8ted 282009 Annexure PA addressedto 0 Education of all the State Govemments that the State 0 Govemmentsmayinitiate immediate action for of scheme of I revlSlOn ofpay in a timebound manner The letter also referredto the issue of Z enhancementof retirement age The State of Punjabvide notification dated t 92009 revisedthe pay scalesofteachersand cadresin the universities I and collegesof the State we l12006 exure P31 as per letter dated Z 31122008 Annexure P3 and also stated that the scheme will be applicable subject to acceptanceof conditionsmentionedin the said letter r11 3 6 CWP N16370 of2009 JagirSinghKahlon and others v State of 7 tl Punjabandanotherwas filed in thisCourtseeking a directionfor revisionof age ofretirementas per notiflcation dated 31122008 and this Coun vide order dated 62010 directed the State Govemment to take a conscious policy decision Thereaitervide letterdated 1132010 Annexure P theMinistryofI wrote to the StateGovernmentsabout the issue of revision of pay scale Refeningto letter dated 3 1122008 it was mentionedthat the scheme could be extended to lnstltutions under the State Goveents providedState Governments wish too adoptand implementthe Scheme It was er mentionedthat as per the said J P4 Batra Amit 2014.07.01 15: 24 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGNAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 75 CWPII 35of 2010 4 letterthe State Govemments are requiredto implement the a 4 cludinhe age of ln para8 ofthis compositeone letter dated311220089together with all the conditions or to be speci8edby Grams Commission oUGCIby regulations and othcr guidelines 7 ThereaRe GrantsCommissionMinimum Appont ofteachersandotherAcademicStaffin UniversitiesandColleges for andother Measures for the Maintenance of standards in HigherEducationo 1 C Regulations ill 2010 were vide notification dated 3020 10 published 0 Gazetteof lndia dated182010 Thesaid regulations have been 8amed byUGC 0 26 of the UGC Act 1956and are to Centralaswell as under 0 and afflliated collegesPara 2 that for State I maintenanceof standardsin higheroeducationshall be as provided in the Atmexure Z TheAnnexure cos imerealiafollowingprovlsionsl er 2eleOThe revisedscalesof pay andother service conditionsincludingage of ln Centraluniversities and other institutions r Z maintaidandlor funded by the UniversityGrants Commission UGC9shall be strictlyin accordancewith the decision of the Central 01 4t MinistryofHuman ResourceDevelopment 7 as containedin endix7 Z Qm 231Fhe revisedscalesof pay and age of as provided in Clause20 abovemay also be extendedto Universitiescolleges otherhighereducationalinstitutionscomingunder the purviewof and the State Legisl and maintained by the State Govemments to the of the scheme as a composlteone in of the terms and conditions laid down in the AD providedas AppendixI and in the Ml leuer Nol 712010J II dated 11 May2010 with all conditions speci6edby the UGC in these Regulations andotherGuidelines n 0 1 Batra Amit 2014.07.01 15: 24 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGNAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 76 CWP tl 55of 2010 l 1 0 AppendixI is letter dated 31122008 Though the Baba Farid Universityof Faridkot revisedthe age of to 65 years inspiteof directionof the Central Govent that assistanceto the StateGovemmentwill be only if the pay scales were revised as per scheme which was one includingthe age of superation theStateGovemment and the State failed to revise the age of to 65 years Accordingly is made out for issuance of direction to complywith the case mandateofthe UGCbyrevisingthe age to 65 yearSe m 8 In the filed by the Stateof Punjabthe stand taken is that the matter of revision of ageof superation wasreferredto a Committee The said C0 I Coee in its meetingheld on 2962010 observedthat therewas no shonageof C qualified teachersin theStateandthere was no needto enhancetheexistingage of the State Govemment appliedfor relaxation of retiremente Z t of the Central Govemment dated 1132010 vide letter dated 1082010 Letter ofthe GovemmentofIndia onlyrelatedto conditions for grant I L2 of assistancewhich is a matter betweenthe State Govemment and the Z Goveent Since the enhancementof age has serious 6nancia1 00 the State Govemment has not the revision of age The 4 z Central Governmenthas not givenany assistanceaer l AOl 0 Leuer dated Qm is based on letter dated2332007 which was to Centrally hiher and technical educationinstitutionscomingunder the purviewof this ministryln orderto overcome the shortageof teachers and thougllas per letter dated2822009 followed by letter dated 11 2010 the same could be extendedto theStates and State universities reimbursementwas to be applicable only ifthe StateGovernments the scheme as a composite package State Govemments wish to adoptand implementthe scheme The Batra Amit 2014.07.01 15: 24 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGNAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document cwPN77 50f2010 V 0 consequence was not of automaticrevision of age The Regulationsadoptingletter dated 31 122008 were also accordinglylimited in their applicabilityand the revised age was not applicableunless specifically extendedto the StateGovernmentsand State universities Thus the petitionwas liable to be dismissed 9 Standof the Universityis that as per service rules adoptedby the age of retirementwas 60 and the said rules have not been andthus prayer in the petitioncould not be accepted Q 10 Standof the UGC is that the revision of age was applicable onlyto 0 0 Centrallyfunded higherandtechnical educationinstitutionsunder the purviewof Z C45 HRD and not to any employee ofa collegewhich is not funded and maintainedby I theUGC However the State Govemmentcould adoptthe decision for revising the Z ageofsupeation 11 We haveheardleamedcounselfor thepartiesand perusedthe record I 12 Leamedcounsel for the petitioners submiuedthatthoughrevision of Z 4 age as per letter dated 23 3 2007 was initiallyapplicableto Centrallyfunded OO higherand technical educaon instimtions comingunder the purviewofthis 2 ministryin order to overcome the shortageof teachers the effect of letter dated C1 31122008 para 86VI was to extendthe same to all Stateuniversities and collegesalso The State Govemmentshavingtaken flnancial assistanceof thc Central Goveent and havingoptedto the revised pay scales could not reJect revlsion of age of as the Stategovemmentshad to the schemecontained in letter dated31 122008 as a compositeschemewithout any rnodification In support of the said submission reliance has been placedOll judgmentof IeamedSingleJudgeof Patna High Court dated 2082010 in CWP Batra Amit 2014.07.01 15: 24 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGNAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CVVP 8 65 of 2010 1 0 N 11348of2010 DreSunitY andjudnent of leamedSingleJudgeof JharkhandHighCourtdated 102011 in WPC C9 No 363 of 2010 DreMaheshwar Tiwary and others v The State of Jharkhand andothers In the context of PanjabUniversityit was submittedthat thoughthe Universitywas under the StateAct ie PanjabUniversity Act 1947it became inter state bodycorporateunder the PunjabReorganization Act1966 and grantsare to be sharedand paidby concemed States asper directive ofthe Central The Vice Chancellorof theUniversity 1 themeetingheld on 2962010 informedthat theUniversity has beenconsidered r in be a Centrally61ndedinstituteunder section2 6ivlofthe CentralEducational 0 to 0 aservationin Admissiono Act 2006 CEI 2006 Act9 Referencehas I alsobeenmadeto theopinionofthe AttomeyGeneraldated2102010 as under 1r It cannot be thatthe PunjabUniversityis one of the Z oldest in the countrybeingestablishedin 1882 at Lahore as East PunjabUniversity Afler partition the er was reeestablishedin India on Ist October 1947and I afterworldng at difTerentplacesfinallymoved to r Z in 1956he Minisuyof is rightlyconcemed111seelng thatthis institutionis not starvedoffunds 0 A letter from Additional Sec to Chairman UGC dated l ll010 has also Z beenreferredto thefollowingefYectl 2 The matter has since been revisited The Central Govemmenthas obtained the opinionof leamed Attorney Generalfor lndia Ocopyenclosedlwho has held that the earlier VleW of the Central Govemment based on which the Central Goveent had indeedflled certain affldavitsbeforecourts of law in matters concerningPunjabUniversity was erroneous Thisopinionofthe AUomeygeneral for India pavesthe way to not only61ndPunjabUniversityfor the purposeof expansioll Batra Amit 2014.07.01 15: 24 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGNAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 79 CWP Il 55of 2010 1 for the CEI Act 2006but also 0 UGC to startmeetingthe financialneedsofPunjabUniversity it was submittedthat thoughearlier the PanjabUniversitywas held not to be Central or funded universityl the judgmentof this Coun in Dre AeCeJulkaand othersv PunjabUniversityand tohers 008 7 SLR 198 the situation has now changed 13 It was pointed out that the Central govemmentln an affidavitfiled PradeshHighCourtin similar writ petitions hastaken a standthat before applicable to the Statesand State the schemedated31122008 W 3O Universities for beingeligiblefor Central assistance Affldavit of Ooe C0 has been Sled as Annexure PA in CWP No6357 of2010 Central I C9 counsel for the State and the State universitiesother than 14 1I PanjabUniversity the submission It was statedthat the decision of the Z CentralGovemment dated2332007 to revise the age of to 65 only to Centrally61ndedhigherand technical education years was I underthe purviewof this ministryin order to overcome the institutionscoming Z shortage of teachers Letterdated31122008 provided that the schemecould be 1 CQ extendedto States State Goveents wish to adoptand implement the scheme Thus till the StateslStateuniversitieswished to adoptOle schemeof Z of age of there was no automaticreVlSlOll of age of Il revlSlOIl Letter dated31122008 was onlyaddressedto UGC letter dated2022009 8om the UGC to the StateGovemmentswas on thesubject offinances involved Similar is the positionwith regardto let dated1152010The 2010 Regulations also did not automatically revlSe the age of exceptin relation to Centrallyfunded higherand technical education instimtionscomingunder the purviewof this ministry in order to overcomethe of teachers In such a situation it was for the State 8F40 Aek4ie Batra Amit 2014.07.01 15: 24 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGNAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP1 65 of 2010 1 Goveents and the State Universities to take a decision to of 11 superation in absenceof which the age of was as in theapplicable nlles View n in thejudgments of JharkhandandPatnaHigh Courtscould not be followed in view ofjudgmentofthe Honble Supreme Coun in Be Bharat Kumar and others ve Osmania Universityand others 620070 11 SCC 58which has been followed by Division Bench ofthis Court in Dre AeCe Julkae Thisbeingthe positionin absenceofconOict in theUGC Regulationanddecision of the State contentionof Regulation beingcoveredunder Entry66 of List I and m 0 thus overridingthe Statelegislationdid not arise as held in similar situationby 0 Honble the SupremeCourt in Be Bharat Kumar and by this Court in Dro AeCe 0 Julkae Distinction pointedout that when the issue was considered in Ba Bharat 32 Kumar andDre AeCeJulka the decision was onlyexecutivedecision and now the I 4 same has been formalized as a stamtoryprovisionby way of Reguiationunder Z section 26 of the UGC Act is not signiScantThe Regulationitself limits the C applicability ofthe revised age to Centrallymdedhigherand technicaleducation er I instituons comingunder the purw of this ministryin order to overcome the 43 z shortageof teachers leavingthe lSsue of extension to other institutions as per c0 letterdated 1132010 Regulation2319 2 15 Learned counsel for the PanjabUniversitysubmittedthat the Panjab Ll University was not a Central universityas earlier held by this Court in DreAeC0Julka and the revised age of was not automatically applicableHowever on account of certalll the 1SSUe whether it was Centrallyfunded was a debatable issue and matter in this regard was pendingwith the Central Govemment and the said universitywi11abide by such decision as may be takenbytheCentral Govemment At this stagethe Panjab Batra Amit 2014.07.01 15: 24 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGNAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 1 81 CWP 35of 2010 r did not wish to any particular stand whether it was centrally 0 or not as the said issue is still to be decidedby the CentralGovemment counsel for the Central Govemment statedthat he has no 16 instructionsin the matter Inview of rival contentionsnoticed above we proceed to deal with 17 thequestions referredfor our adjudication Re I Deememendmeno thestatutory rules bv virtue ofscheme dated 310121008 1 r dated 3 1 122008 refers to revision of age of 18 The 0 2332007which appliesto Centrallyfunded i3 vide letter dated I higJlerand technical institutionscomingunder the purviewof this C5 I minisUyin orderto overcome the ofteachers As per sub para p9of Z para 8 the schememay be extendedto other institutionswho wish to adoptthe Clause ogIof subpara 001 orovidesthat centralassistancewas subjectto same the schemebeing as schemeThus the saidschemcdoes I t notenvisageautomatic revision of age to all institutions unless the State Z Govemmentswish to adoptthe same Iftheydo not wish to adoptthe same it may CQ have ramification on central assistancebeingprovidedas rnentionedtherein 7 Z of the said scheme in regulation does not changeits character as the also provides that the schemedoes not extendto all the institutionsunless as per para 23 The matter was consideredby tlle HonbleSupremeCourt with regardto similar schemedated 271 998 and the schemewas held to be voltl The contention that the scheme must be as a COOSlte oone was Contention with regardto of Entry 66 of List I was also rejectedWe may quote below Uoe relevant partof letter dated 271998 interpreted by the Honble SupremeCoult lll Batra Amit 2014.07.01 15: 24 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGNAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document J 82 CWP 65 of 2010 i O and relevant part of letter dated 312998 which we have to for companson Letter dated 270701998