(1.) Petitioner, who is working as Director of the Department of Publications in the Kerala University, seeks a declaration that he is entitled to continue in service till he attains the age of 60 years. Petitioner also challenges Ext.P7 Circular issued by the University on 26.11.2019, which includes his name also among the employees of the University, retiring from service on superannuation in the year 2020, showing the date of his retirement as 31.05.2020.
(2.) While the petitioner was working as Programme Officer in the Kerala State Audio-Visual and Reprographic Centre, the 2nd respondent University issued Ext.P4 notification inviting applications for appointment to the post of Director, Department of Publications. Pursuant to that he submitted application and on being successful in the selection he was appointed as Director of Publications as per Ext.P4 order dated 05.11.2012, in the scale of pay of Rs.25400-33100 (pre-revised). In this order it was stated that his appointment would be governed by Section 73 of the Kerala University Act, 1974 and Statutes and Ordinances framed thereunder. Petitioner claims that all his predecessors in the post could continue in service till they attained 60 years on the basis of Ext.P1 order issued by the University on 19.09.1975 by which sanction was accorded for the Director, Assistant Director and qualified Publication Assistants of the Department of Publications to enjoy the benefit of retirement age of 60 without conferring academic status to the department. Petitioner points out that when one Dr.Razaludeen, the previous incumbent in the post was sought to be relieved on attaining the age of 55 years, he had approached this Court and he was allowed to continue till the age of 60 years. Therefore petitioner asserts that in the light of Ext.P9 judgment dated 11.08.2006 in W.A.No.865 of 2006, he is also entitled to continue till he attained the age of 60 years. He therefore argues that Ext.P7 Circular including his name among the persons who retire from service in 2020 is issued without any authority.
(3.) In the statement filed on behalf of the University, it is stated that the scale of pay, qualification, age etc., of the Director, the Department of Publication is covered by Clause 3 of Schedule 100 in Chapter XVII of the Kerala University First Ordinance 1978 and the appointment to the said post is made in accordance with Statute 8 of Chapter IV in Part II of the Kerala University First Statutes, 1977. According to the University only those who are holding teaching posts are eligible to continue in service till the age of 60 years. As per Clause 2 of Chapter IV of the Kerala University First Statutes 1977 r/w Rule 60 (a) Part I KSR all the non teaching staff has to retire on the last date of the month in which he attains the age of 56 years and petitioner who is not holding a teaching post can therefore continue only till 31.05.2020 on which day he would attain the age of 56 years. The respondents have stated that the Director of Publication does not come within the term of a teacher as defined under Section 2(27) and he is not a teacher of the University as defined under Section 2(28). The retirement age of the teachers of the University is governed by Statute 10 of Chapter 3 of the Kerala University First Statutes, according to which they can continue till the age of 60 years. It is pointed out that Statute 2(1) of Chapter IV of the 1977 Statutes makes the provisions contained in Kerala Service Rules (KSR),1959 applicable to the University Employees and thus the retirement age applicable to petitioner is 56 years as provided in KSR. Regarding the judgment Ext.P9 in W.A.No.865 of 2006, the contention of the University is that in 2001, the syndicate had taken a decision that the retirement age of the Director, Department of Publications would be 60 years. However despite that decision, the University issued a notice to Dr.Razaludeen, directing that he had retired at the age of 55 years. Paragraphs 7 and 8 of the statement reads as follows: