Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 11]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Veena Kumari vs State Of H.P. And Others on 5 August, 2021

Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Bench: Ravi Malimath, Jyotsna Rewal Dua

                                            1



             HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

                                                C.W.P. No. 1635 of 2019

                                                Date of decision: 05.08.2021




                                                                                 .

    Veena Kumari                                                         ...Petitioner

                                      Versus





    State of H.P. and others                      ...Respondents
    ____________________________________________________
    Coram:
    The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ravi Malimath, Acting Chief Justice



    Whether approved for reporting1 :
                         r                  to
    The Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

    For the Petitioner(s):            S/Shri Bhuvnesh Sharma and Ramakant
                                      Sharma, Advocates.

    For the Respondents:              Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate General,


                                      with Mr. Ranjan Sharma, Mr. Vikas
                                      Rathore Ms.Ritta Goswami, Additional
                                      Advocates General and Ms. Seema
                                      Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, for




                                      the State





                                      Mr. K.D.Sood, Senior Advocate, with Mr.
                                      Sukrit Sood, Advocate, for respondents
                                      No. 2, 4 and 5.





                         Through Video Conference
    ____________________________________________________
    Jyotsna Rewal Dua,J.

On the strength of the rules "Relating to the Teachers of Non Government Affiliated Colleges", the petitioner 1 Whether Reporters of local newspaper are permitted to see the judgment ?

::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:49:30 :::CIS 2

prays that she be allowed to continue to work till her attaining the age of 60 years and at the end of the academic session on 30.06.2022.

.

2. The petitioner was appointed as Sahitya Acharya in Sanskrit Vidayalaya Jawalamukhi on 21.07.2005 in respondent No.2 institution. This institution is affiliated to H.P. University, Shimla as Shree Maa Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya, Jawalamukhi. The service condition of its teachers are governed by H.P. University Ordinances. Appendix A Chapter XXXVIII Paragraph 38.5 B(d) of the Ordinances contains the rules relating to the teachers of Non Government Affiliated Colleges. Rule 12 of these Rules reads as under :-

"12. Every teacher shall retire at the age of 60 years.
However, a teacher shall be allowed to continue in service till the end of the semester or the academic session even though he may have attained the age of 60 years."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that respondent No.2 institution is affiliated to the H.P. University, therefore, the petitioner should be allowed to continue in service till she attains the age of 60 years and also till the end of the academic session. The petitioner's date of birth is 29.08.1961.

She will attain the age of 60 years on 28.08.2021. Her due date of ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:49:30 :::CIS 3 retirement at the end of academic session in accordance with above extracted rule 12 will be 30.06.2022.

4. The factual situation has not been disputed by Mr. .

K.D. Sood, learned Senior Advocate, appearing on behalf of respondents No. 2, 4 and 5. He has also not disputed the fact that respondent No.2 educational institution at present is affiliated with the respondent University. That being the position, the rules relating to the teachers of Non Government Affiliated Colleges as contained in Appendix A of the H.P. University Ordinance become applicable to the petitioner. She, therefore, is entitled to continue to service till she attains the age of 60 years (28.08.2021) and till the end of academic session which statedly will be over on 30.06.2022. This position of law has already been reiterated in CWP No. 2209 of 2009, titled Dr. Devender Nath Kashyap Versus Baba Balak Nath Temple Trust and others, decided on 27.09.2011 and followed in CWP No. 4312 of 2012 Rattneshwar Jha, Versus Shri Shakti Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya, Shri Naina Devi Ji and others and 4313 of 2012 titled Dr. Karam Singh Rana, Versus Baba Balak Nath Temple Trust, Deothsidh and others as well as in LPA No. 45 of 2013 titled Baba Balak Nath Temple Trust Vs. Karam Singh Rana and LPA No. 51 of 2013 titled Shri Shakti Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya Vs. Rattneshwar Jha.

::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:49:30 :::CIS 4

The case of the petitioner is covered by the aforesaid decisions. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to permit the petitioner to continue to .

work in the respondent No.2 institution till 30.06.2022 when the current academic session would come to an end. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

                     r            to            ( Ravi Malimath )
                                               Acting Chief Justice

    5th August, 2021 (K)                       ( Jyotsna Rewal Dua )
                                                      Judge








                                                  ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:49:30 :::CIS