M VELAYUDHAN NAIR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner who was working with the respondent no.2/National Museum Institute of History of Art, Conservation and Museology (Deemed University) as Professor (Conservation), seeks the relief that he should be retired not at the age of 62 years on 31.1.2013 but that he should be retired at the age of 65 years in view of the circular dated 4.4.2007 of the University Grants Commission which attached therewith the circular dated 23.3.2007 of the Ministry of Human Resource Development (HRD).

(2.) A reading of the circular of the Ministry of HRD dated 23.3.2007 shows that the issue of increase of age of retirement is with respect to centrally funded institutions in higher and technical education under the Ministry of HRD i.e not to any other centrally funded institution in higher and technical education under any other ministry except the Ministry of HRD. Admittedly, the respondent no.2 is under the Ministry of Culture and not under the Ministry of HRD. Therefore, the circular dated 23.3.2007 of the Ministry of HRD will not ipso facto apply to the respondent no.2 which is under the Ministry of Culture of the Union of India/respondent no.1.

(3.) PETITIONER in this case retired at the age of 62 years on 31.1.2013. Respondent no.1/Ministry of Culture only subsequently vide its decision dated 20.10.2014 enhanced the age of retirement to 65 years with prospective effect i.e if a person who retired prior to 20.10.2014, such a person/employee of the respondent no.2 would not be entitled to the benefit of higher retirement age up to 65 years.