1 D.B.Civil Special Appeal(Writ) No.1993/2008 Managing Committee, Shri Khandelwal Vaish Kendriya, Senior Secondary School V/s Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Tribunal & ors. 15.12.2008 Hon'ble the Chief Justice Mr.Narayan Roy Hon'ble Mr.Justice Raghuvendra S.Rathore Mr.Babu Lal Gupta for the appellant. Mr.D.P.Sharma for the respondent no.2. This special appeal is directed against the order dated 12th August, 2008 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court whereby he has dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant. The writ petition was filed by the petitioner- appellant against the order dated 15th May, 2008 passed by the Rajasthan Non-Govt. Educational Institutions Tribunal, Jaipur whereby the order dated 28th Feb.2005 was set aside and a direction was issued that the respondent no.2 be allowed to continue in service upto 60 years, the prescribed age of superannuation, in view of amendment made vide Notification dated 30th June, 2004. The learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner has submitted that two courts below have erred in passing the orders impugned because it was not the pleadings of the respondent no.2 that her services were terminated. According to him, the respondent no.2 had come with the case that she has been superannuated at the age of 58 years whereas she should have been allowed to continue in service upto 60 years in view 2 of the aforesaid amendment of 2004. Further he has submitted that the respondent no.2 was never regularly appointed and as such, she was not entitled for the benefits of superannuation. We have carefully considered the orders impugned passed by the courts below and the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner. In the instant case, appointment to the respondent no.2 on the post of Primary School Teacher was given in pursuance of advertisement (Annex.1), which was issued on 9th June, 1983. Thereafter, interview was held and appointment was given to the respondent no.2 on 2nd July, 1983, on temporary basis. Thereafter, the appointment of the respondent no.2 was extended upto 15th May, 1985, vide order dated 25th April, 1984. It is an admitted position that since May, 1985, the respondent no.2 had been continued in service with the appellant-Institution upto the month of Feb.2005. It is the case of the appellant- Institution itself that after appointment of the respondent no.2, she was given all monetary benefits, as applicable to other teachers. As a matter of fact, the reply filed by the appellant-Institution before the Tribunal, as referred to in para 9 of the order of the Tribunal dated 15th May, 2008, leaves no room of doubt that after May, 1985, the respondent no.2 had been continued in service upto 2005 and she was given all the benefits as given to a teacher. The amendment made vide Notification dated 30th June 2004 also makes it clear that the age of superannuation of the teachers has been extended from 58 years to 60 years. The said amendment was made by the State Government in exercise of the power under 3 section 43 of the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institution Act, 1989. The learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on the judgment in the case of Vidyavardhaka Sangha and anr. V/s Y.D.Deshpande and ors. ((2006) 12 SCC 482). Suffice it to say that the said judgment was passed by the apex court in the facts and circumstances of that case and therefore, it is not applicable to the present case. For the reasons aforesaid, we are of the considered opinion that the two courts below have not committed any illegality or infirmity so as to call for any interference by this Court in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction. Consequently, this appeal is dismissed. (Raghuvendra S.Rathore)J. (Narayan Roy)C.J. Parmar