SUMITRA DHULIYA Vs. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Smt. Sumitra Dhuliya served on the post of Professor in Central Paedological Institute, Allahabad ( in short, 'CPI, Allahabad), upto the age of 58 years, and retired on superannuation on 31.3.1996. She claimed benefit of Government Order dated 21.3.1984, providing that those teachers, who are engaged in teaching in Government institutions, will be entitled to continue till the end of the academic session i.e. 30th June of the year during which they are going to retire, if their date of birth falls between 2nd July and 29th June of the academic session. She was not given the benefit of the extension of service provided by the Government Order dated 21.3.1984. She filed the writ petition praying for a writ of mandamus commanding the Director of Education (Madhyamik), U.P. Lucknow-respondent No. 1, and the Additional Director of Education (Madhyamik), Education Directorate, UP Allahabad-respondent No. 2 to extend her services upto 30.6.1996. By an interim order dated 29.3.1996 she was permitted to continue to serve on the post, which she was holding. The Division Bench, at the time of hearing of the writ petition on 21.4.2009, noticed an apparent conflict in the view taken by the two Division Benches in the same year. It was found that in Sarju Prasad v. State of UP and others Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 896 of 1967 decided on 14.3.1997 a Division Bench of this Court held that the Government Order is applicable only to the teachers, who are teaching in a particular session, and not to the training institutes. In a later Division Bench decision in the same year in Rajpati Pandey v. State of UP and others Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 20756 of 1990 decided on 02.05.1997 a Division Bench held that the Government Order dated 21.3.1998 will also apply to Central Paedological Institute, Allahabad (CPI), as it is a Government institute and teaching takes place in the said institute. The matter was thus referred to a larger bench to resolve the conflict.

(2.) In our opinion, following questions arise for consideration by us:

(3.) Whether the view taken by Division Bench in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 896 of 1967 Sarju Prasad v. State of UP and Ors. decided on 14.3.1997 lays down the correct law?