Preloader

Assistant Professors of Chandigarh Technical Institute to Retire at 65 Not 58: Punjab and Haryana HC

Assistant Professors of Chandigarh Technical Institute to Retire at 65 Not 58: Punjab and Haryana HC

13.08.2021 | Education News | EduLegaL  | www.edulegal.org | mail@edulegal.in

The Punjab and Haryana High Court in Dr. Jogender Pal Singh and Others Vs. Union of India and Others held that the AICTE Regulations, 2019 would apply in supersession of the rules made by the President under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution and directed the Chandigarh Union Territory Administration to reappoint the petitioners as assistant professors of Government College of Arts and Government College of Architecture, who were superannuated after attaining 60 years of age.

The Division Bench of Justice A G Masih and Justice A K Verma observed:

“Once the Parliament legislates, such Act and the rules/regulations framed there under, would take over the field resulting in the rules framed by the president under proviso to Article 309 seizing to operate forthwith”

By a notification dated 13th January 1992, issued by the President under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution, the Conditions of Service of Union Territory of Chandigarh Employees Rules, 1992 were brought into effect according to which, the superannuation age was set at 58 years (with extension up to 60 years). Later, the AICTE Regulations, 2019 were framed which set the superannuation age at 65 years (with an extension up to 70 years).

By applying the Rules, 1992, the Administration of Union Territory of Chandigarh superannuated the petitioners after attaining 60 years of age.

Aggrieved, the petitioners approached the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) which held that the Rules, 1992 would apply as the Union Territory of Chandigarh has not adopted the Regulations, 2019. Thereafter, the petitioners approached the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

The Chandigarh Administration contended that the AICTE Regulations are applicable to only Central Educational Institutes, Centrally Funded Institutions, or Central Universities. To this contention, the court pointed out that the Central Government provides the funds for the institutions within the ambit of the Chandigarh Administration. Further, the court added that such a requirement of being centrally funded was not necessary for the applicability of the Regulations, 2019.

In conclusion, the Punjab and Haryana High Court set aside the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) and directed the Chandigarh UT Administration to reinstate the petitioners as assistant professors of the Government College of Arts and Government College of Architecture.

Ankitha Subramanya | EduLegaL

Print Article

Leave a Reply

avatar
TOP