2019 (5) TMI 1937 - SC - Indian Laws

Entitlement of Teachers working in private aided educational institutions in the State of Madhya Pradesh to the benefit of enhanced age of superannuation of 65 years - HELD THAT - There is no manner of doubt that the Coordination Committee has the power to prepare, amend and repeal the Statutes. It can do so on its own motion or on receiving a proposal from the Executive Council of a University. The procedure to be followed in case there is a proposal from the Executive Council of the University to frame Statutes is prescribed thereunder. A plain reading of Section 36 would make it clear that the views of the Executive Council have to be obtained by the Coordination Committee only in case the proposal has emanated from the Executive Council of a University for preparing a Statute. Such procedure is not applicable when the Coordination Committee prepares a Statute on its own motion. Admittedly, the amendment to Statute 28 of the College Code on 07.01.2004 was not based on any proposal from the Executive Council of any University. It was made by the Coordination Committee on its own motion. The interpretation of Section 34 (4) of the 1973 Adhiniyam by the High Court that the Coordination Committee can only suggest modifications of the said Statutes in force is not correct. The High Court has gone wrong in observing that any proposal for amendment to a Statute made by the Coordination Committee has to be sent to the Executive Council of the University. The power to amend the Statute is conferred on the Coordination Committee and not on the Executive Council as has been understood by the High Court. A further error committed by the High Court was to hold that there is no recommendation of the Standing Committee on the basis of which a Resolution was passed on 07.01.2004. The High Court lost sight of the minutes of meeting of the Standing Committee dated 01.04.2003 by which recommendation was made to maintain the age of superannuation of Teachers working in aided private Colleges at par with those working in the Government Colleges. It is clear from the facts that the matter pertaining to the age of superannuation of Teachers working in aided private Colleges was referred by the Coordination Committee to the Standing Committee. On the basis of the recommendations of the Standing Committee, the Coordination Committee passed a Resolution on 07.01.2004 which was given effect to by an amendment to Clause 26 of the College Code - The Standing Committee and the Coordination Committee of the University is represented by the Senior Officers of the State Government and it is not for the State Government to contend that they will not extend the benefit of enhancement of the age of superannuation till 65 years to the Teachers working in the private aided institutes in spite of the provisions in the College Code. The Government of Madhya Pradesh are directed to pay salaries to the Teachers in aided private Colleges who are working and also those who have worked till they attained the age of superannuation of 65 years - appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Entitlement of Teachers in private aided educational institutions in Madhya Pradesh to the benefit of enhanced age of superannuation of 65 years.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Background and Appointment:
The appellant was appointed as a Lecturer in Commerce (later Assistant Professor) on 01.09.1979 at an affiliated college receiving 100% grant-in-aid from the State Government.

2. Legislative Amendments and Recommendations:
On 02.09.1998, the Madhya Pradesh Shaskiya Sevak (Adhivarshiki Ayu) Second Amendment Act, 1998, increased the retirement age of Government Teachers from 60 to 62 years, extending this benefit to Teachers in private aided colleges. On 01.04.2003, the Standing Committee recommended that the retirement age of private college staff should be aligned with Government college staff, a recommendation approved by the Coordination Committee on 07.01.2004.

3. 2008 Scheme and UGC Regulations:
The Ministry of Human Resources Development introduced a pay revision scheme on 31.12.2008, which included increasing the retirement age to 65 years. The Madhya Pradesh Government accepted this on 16.04.2010 for Government college staff. The UGC Regulations, 2010, framed under Section 26 (1) (d) (e) of the UGC Act, 1956, fixed the retirement age at 65 years. On 02.05.2011, the Madhya Pradesh Government amended the relevant provisions to extend the retirement age to 65 years for Government college Teachers.

4. Legal Disputes and Court Orders:
The withdrawal of grant-in-aid for salaries of Teachers in 100% aided private institutes was contested and resolved by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.71 of 2004. The Court directed the extension of 6th Pay Commission scales to private aided educational institute staff, effective from 01.01.2006.

5. High Court Proceedings:
The appellant challenged the management's order retiring him at 62 years by filing a Writ Petition, which was dismissed. The Division Bench referred two questions to a Larger Bench regarding the applicability of enhanced retirement age to private institute Teachers. The Full Bench concluded that Statute 28 was not amended as it was merely a recommendation and that UGC Regulations, 2010, were not automatically applicable to the State Government.

6. Supreme Court's Analysis:
The Supreme Court analyzed Section 36 of the 1973 Adhiniyam, emphasizing the Coordination Committee's power to prepare, amend, and repeal Statutes independently. The Court found that the High Court's interpretation requiring Executive Council approval for amendments initiated by the Coordination Committee was erroneous. The Supreme Court noted that the recommendation to align the retirement age was indeed implemented by amending Statute 28 of the College Code.

7. Conclusion and Directions:
The Supreme Court disagreed with the High Court's conclusion that the Coordination Committee's resolution was merely a recommendation and that UGC Regulations required State Government adoption. The Court held that the Coordination Committee's decision was binding and directed the Madhya Pradesh Government to pay salaries to Teachers in aided private colleges who worked till the enhanced retirement age of 65 years.

Judgment:
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgments and allowed the appeals, directing the Madhya Pradesh Government to implement the enhanced retirement age and pay the corresponding salaries.