LAWS(MAD)-2015-3-365

R. GUNASEKARAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Decided On March 05, 2015
R. GUNASEKARAN Appellant
V/S
Union of India And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the impugned order dated 05.09.2003, the petitioner was directed to retire from service on attaining the age of 58 years as per the then existing service Rules. Aggrieved against the same, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition with a prayer to quash the same, on the ground that the Government of India, vide notification dated 28.07.2003, has declared the Regional Engineering College, Trichy, as National Institute of Technology, Trichy, with Deemed University status and thereafter, by another communication dated 12.11.2003, the age of superannuation of the staffs has been fixed as 60 years. Therefore, it is the contention of the petitioner that he should have been allowed to retire on reaching the age of 60 years.

(2.) IT is further contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that originally, he joined as Attender in the Regional Engineering College, Trichy, on 01.10.1996, and thereafter, he was promoted as Mechanic 'A'(SG) in the Department of Civil Engineering. Pursuant to the take over by the Central Government, he became employee of the National Institute of Technology, Trichy, with effect from 14.05.2003. Therefore, upon take over by the Central Government, he should have been allowed to continue his service till the age of 60 years, he contended.

(3.) IT is the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent that though the Central Government, by communication dated 12.11.2003, increased the age of superannuation to 60 years from 58 years to all the employees working in National Institute of Technology, as per the Clause 5 of the above said communication, the date of retirement shall come into effect from the month in which it is adopted by the Board of Governors (BoGs) of the respective National Institute of Technologies (NITs) In this case, the Board of Governors met on 10.01.2004 and thereby decided to implement the above said memorandum with effect from 01.01.2004. Therefore, the Director has passed the impugned order dated 05.09.2003 retiring the petitioner from service on attaining the age of 58 years as per the then existing rules. Thus, it is contended, the petitioner cannot avail the benefits of the new services rules, especially when the Clause 5 of the memorandum dated 12.11.2003 categorically states that this provision of retirement shall come into effect from the month in which it is adopted by the Board Governors of the respective NITs.