Rakesh Tiwari - (1.) -Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. The petitioner has sought quashing of impugned notice dated 27.1.2005, contained in Annexure-9 to the writ petition informing the petitioner that he shall be retired from the college service in the afternoon of 1.4.2005.
(2.) THE petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Accountant Clerk on 24.10.1970 in Dev Nagari Degree College, Meerut. THE college is affiliated to the Chaudhari Charan Singh University, Meerut to which the provisions of the State Universities Act, 1973 are applicable. THE petitioner was promoted to the post of Senior Clerk on 20.11.1980. After promotion the petitioner is working as the Office Superintendent, a Class III post, in the college. A Government order dated 6.4.1984 was issued by the Director of Higher Education, U. P., Allahabad, amending earlier Government order dated 18.1.1983, providing that the non-teaching staff giving option for retirement at the age of 60 years will be entitled to pension, family pension and G.P.F. only while the non-teaching staff giving option for retirement at the age of 58 years will be given the benefit of death-cum-retirement gratuity at par with the State Government employees along with pension and G.P.F. It is further provided therein that the option was to be given within 90 days of the issuance of the Government order. By another Government order/ Circular dated 4.2.2004 the age of retirement of teachers has been enhanced to 62 years. The said order is as under : ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMMITED]...
(3.) BY means of this writ petition the petitioner has claimed that he should also be retired at the age of 62 years in view of the aforesaid Government order dated 4.2.2004. From the Circular/ Government order dated 4.2.2004, it appears that the age of only those teachers has been enhanced from 60 to 62 years who are working in �?U* �� ?���??� �?l� �, �?U* �� (c)U � ?���??� �?l� � ??� "U���� ?��� (c)U � ?���??� �?l� � in which the State Government has created posts. Prima facie the Circular/Government order dated 4.2.2004 is not applicable to the present case.;