- (1.) These two intra-court appeals preferred against the common order dated 21.07.2010 passed by the learned Single Judge on the prayer for interim relief in respective writ petitions were considered together on 02.08.2010; and, after hearing the parties at length, we allowed the appeals while making observations for expeditious proceedings in the pending writ petitions for the reasons delineated infra.
(2.) The private respondents in these appeals have been working on different posts in the appellant - Maharana Pratap University of Agriculture and Technology, Udaipur ('the appellant-University' hereafter). Faced with imminent retirement with the end of the months of July, August and September on completion of age of 60 years, the petitioners preferred the writ petitions wherefrom have arisen these appeals. The sum and substance of the submissions and the contentions of the writ petitioners has been that on 31.12.2008, the Ministry of Human Resource Development ('MHRD') in its Department of Higher Education framed a scheme of 'revision of pay of teachers and equivalent cadres in Universities and Colleges following the revision of pay scales of Central Government employees on the recommendations of the Sixth Central Pay Commission' wherein it was stated, inter alia, that superannuation age of the teachers has already been enhanced to 65 years and directions were issued to the University Grants Commission ('UGC') that the scheme may be extended to the universities, colleges and other higher educational institutions coming under the purview of State Legislature provided that the State Government wishes to adopt and implement this scheme. According to the petitioners, the UGC also issued the orders on 28.02.2009 to all the concerned Education Secretaries of the respective State Governments to adopt the scheme of revision of pay and enhancement of retirement age. The petitioners further pointed out that the Indian Council of Agricultural Research ('ICAR') issued directions for adopting the said scheme dated 31.12.2008; and the Government of India in its Department of Agricultural Research also directed the State Government to implement the said scheme. The petitioners further averred that on 11.05.2010, the MHRD reiterated that while implementing the scheme dated 31.12.2008, reimbursement by the competent authority would be applicable only when the State Government implements the scheme of revision of pay scales of teachers and equivalent cadres as a composite package including the age of superannuation. The petitioners also referred to the UGC Regulations for minimum qualification for appointment of teachers and measures for maintenance of standards in higher education wherein it has, inter alia, been provided that,- The revised scales of pay and other service conditions including age of superannuation in central universities and other institutions maintained and/ or funded by the University Grants Commission (UGC), shall be strictly in accordance with the decision of the Central Government, Ministry of Human Resource Development (Department of Education), as contained in Appendix-1.
(3.) The petitioners contended that due to inaction and apathy on the part of the respondent-State in not adopting and implementing the scheme, several teachers had already retired on attaining the age of 60 years and others would be retiring soon but on the doctrine of legitimate expectation, the petitioners were entitled to get the benefit of enhanced age of superannuation i.e., 65 years. While alleging acts and omissions of the State to be illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional, the petitioners preferred the writ petitions aforesaid and prayed for the reliefs in the following manner (as reproduced from CWP No.6430/2010):- "A/ By an appropriate writ order or direction, the impugned provision incorporated in (xiii) of para 4 of the impugned notification dated 18.11.2009 may kindly be declared illegal being contrary to (x) of para 4 of the notification dated 18.11.2009 and being contrary to clause (f) of para 8 of the Central Government order dated 31.12.2008. Thus, the same also kindly be declared illegal and invalid being violative of the Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India therefore the same may kindly be struck down and set aside, with all consequential benefits. B/ By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to comply with the scheme of 31.12.2008 (Annex.) as composite one and consequently enhance the age of superannuation from 60 to 65 years. C/ By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to comply with the mandatory provisions of UGC for age of superannuation and the same may be made applicable with all consequential benefits upon the petitioners. D/ By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to withhold the UGC grant to the University until the University undertakes to follow the scheme of 31/12/2008 in totality. E/ Any order appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioners. F/ Writ petition filed by the petitioner may kindly be allowed with costs." The respondent-University entered caveat in the said writ petitions which were considered along with other similar matters concerning other universities on 21.07.2010; and the learned Single Judge of this Court proceeded to pass the impugned interim order that reads as under:- Mr. G.R. Punia, has filed caveat on behalf of respondent Maharana Pratap University of Agriculture & Technology, Udaipur in SBCWP No. 6429/2010 & 6430/2010. He may be supplied two sets of writ petition during the course of the day. Mr. P.R. Singh appears for the Jai Narain Vyas University in SBCWP No. 6428/2010 & 6431/2010. He is directed to accept notice. Two sets of writ petition be supplied to him during the course of the day.;