NOOR MOHAMMAD Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application moved on behalf of respondent no.3/ Jamia Milia Islamia (JMI) to seek vacation of the interim order dated 08.08.2013. By virtue of the interim order dated 08.08.2013, petitioner no.1 has continued in service beyond his usual age of superannuation, which is 62 years. I am informed that, petitioner no.1 reached the age of 62 years on 31.08.2013.

(2.) THE facts, in this writ petition need not be gone into in detail since the issue raised in the present writ petition has been dealt with extensively by a Division Bench of this court in a batch of writ petitions; the lead writ petition being: WP(C) No. 7130/2011, titled: Krishan Gopal vs Union of India & Ors. The judgment, in the said writ petition, along with the connected writ petition, being: WP(C) No. 7939/2011, titled: Damayanti V. Tambay vs Union of India & Ors., was delivered on 18.05.2012. 2.1 The issue in those writ petitions, broadly, was: whether Librarians and Directors of Physical Education are at par with the teachers, with respect to claim for age enhancement. This writ petition is confined to Directors of Physical Education. The Division Bench vide its judgment dated 18.05.2012, on this aspect of the matter, in Krishan Gopal's case made the following observations:

(3.) HAVING regard to the reasons supplied by the respondents and the material supplied by the petitioners in those cases, the Division Bench was persuaded, albeit based on the data made available from internet by the petitioners, that the rationale provided by the respondents, would need a deeper scrutiny. It appears that the data provided by the petitioners seemed to demonstrate, at least tentatively, that there was shortage, as in the case of teachers, in respect of Librarians and Directors of Physical Education, as well. It is in this context that the following directions were issued by the Division Bench, which are contained in paragraph 34 of the judgment: