Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Dr.Ashok Sharma And Others vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others on 31 August, 2016

Author: Tarlok Singh Chauhan

Bench: Tarlok Singh Chauhan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA .

CWP No.10086 of 2011 a/w CWPs No.10161, 10169 and 10170 of 2011.

Date of decision: 31.08.2016.

1. CWP No.10086 of 2011.

Dr.Ashok Sharma and others .......Petitioner s.

of Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others ......Respondent s.

2. rt CWP No.10161 of 2011.

K.C.Gupta and others .......Petitioners.

Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others ......Respondents.

3. CWP No.10169 of 2011.

Kamal Dev Chandel and another .......Petitioners.

Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others ......Respondents.

4. CWP No.10170 of 2011.

Hem Raj Jaswal .......Petitioner.

Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others ......Respondents.

Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1No For the Petitioner(s) : Mr.Rajnish Maniktala, Advocate, in all the petitions.

     For the Respondents                  : Ms.Meenakshi Sharma, Additional
                                            Advocate         General      with

Mr.J.S.Guleria, Assistant Advocate General, for respondents No.1 and 2/State.

Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?

::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:06:57 :::HCHP 2

Mr.K.D.Sood, Senior Advocate with Mr.Dhanjay Sharma, Advocate, for respondents No.3 .

and 4.

Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge (Oral).

Since common questions of facts and law arise for consideration in these petitions, the same are taken up together for of hearing and are being disposed of by a common judgment.

2. The petitioners had filed these petitions claiming therein rt the following reliefs:-

"(i) That the order dated November 2011 (Annexure: P-12), conveying the age of retirement at 58 years may be quashed and set aside.

(ii) That the respondents may be restrained from retiring the petitioner before the age of 60 years or before the end of academic session as per the provisions of HPU Statutes and Ordinances.

(iii) The respondents No.1 and 2 may be directed to continue contributing 95% grant in aid towards salary of petitioner upto the age of retirement of 60 years or end of academic session."

3. The learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record the instructions issued by the Government of Himachal Pradesh on 29.08.2016 whereby it has been decided that the teachers including the petitioners shall retire as per the provisions contained in Rule-12 of H.P. University Ordinance, 1973.

4. Indisputably, in terms of the aforesaid Rule, the teachers are to retire at the age of 60 years or at the end of completion of the Academic Session. Once, it is so, then these petitions have been rendered as infructuous and are disposed of as such alongwith all pending applications, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

August 31, 2016. (Tarlok Singh Chauhan) (krt) Judge.

::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:06:57 :::HCHP