OKRAM PRAMODINI DEVI AND ORS Vs. THE STATE OF MANIPUR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Shri T. Rajendra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners; Smt. Th. Sobhana, learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 and Shri S. Rupachandra, learned ASG appearing for the respondent No. 4.

(2.) THE present writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners challenging the impugned Government orders dated 25 -04 -2014 and 04 -06 -2014 and since all the petitions have arisen out of the same set of facts, the same are being disposed of by a common judgment and order. Ccording to the petitioners namely Shri K. Manojkumar Singh and Smt. O. Pramodini Devi, they retired from service as Librarians, L.M.S. Law College and Imphal College on attaining the age of superannuation of 62 years with effect from 31 -03 -2014 and 31 -12 -2013 respectively vide order dated 28 -01 -2014 issued by the Deputy Secretary (Hr. Education), Government of Manipur. While the petitioners were waiting for the retirement benefits as well as pension being given to them and to the shock of the petitioners, the Deputy Secretary (Hr. Education) issued another order dated 25 -04 -2014, in partial modification of the earlier order dated 28 -01 -2014, stating that the Governor was pleased to retire the petitioners on attaining the age of 60 years with effect from 31 -03 -2012 and 31 -12 -2011 respectively.

(3.) IT is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that as per the scheme of the University Grants Commission, New Delhi informed vide its letter dated 19 -10 -2006 and its Regulation 2010, the age of superannuation of Assistant Librarians/College Librarians and Assistant Directors of Physical Education had been decided to be 62 years which is substantiated by the clarificatory letter dated 24 -10 -2013 of the Deputy Secretary (Hr. & Tech. Edn.), Government of Manipur wherein it is stated that the Govt. College Librarian posted in Colleges, being not involved in class room teaching, were to retire on attaining the age of 62 years and accordingly, the Joint Director of Univ. & Hr. Education vide its letter dated 30 -10 -2013 sought for conveying approval. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the State Government had rightly issued the order dated 28 -01 -2014 retiring the petitioners on attaining the age of 62 years with the last pay certificates being issued and that after having the whole thing being settled including the payment of salary upto the age of 62 years, the orders dated 25 -04 -2014 and 04 -06 -2014 issued without giving an opportunity of being heard, are bad in law and are liable to be quashed. An alternative submission was made by the counsel for the petitioner that since the petitioners had been allowed to continue in service till the age of 62 years with full salary and for no fault of theirs, the retirement benefits as well as the pension was to be computed on the basis of the last pay drawn in terms of the law laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kailash Singh v. State of Bihar & ors., reported in : (2005) 13 SCC 576.