(1.) The petitioners are the Professors in various faculties in Sri Potti Sri Ramulu Telugu University and Andhra University Colleges, particulars of faculties in which the petitioners are working are not required to be elaborated. They filed the writ petition seeking mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not implementing the policy of the Central Government in its entirety as enunciated in orders, dated 31.12.2008, which is incorporated in the U.G.C. Regulations, dated 30.6.2010, (hereafter referred to as 'the UGC Regulations, 2010') so far as the extension of the age of superannuation of the petitioners from 60 years to 65 years as illegal, unjust, arbitrary, discriminatory. They moved the instant application seeking the following interim relief:
(2.) Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that though a Division Bench of this Court in WP No. 12726 of 2010 and Batch dated 20.1.2011 (Prof. B. Surya Prakash Rao and others v. Union of India, Ministry of HRD and others) dealt the issue basing on Central Government Notifications, the UGC Regulations, 2010, have not been referred in the said decision. Since, the UGC Regulations, 2010, have been framed by the UGC in exercise of powers under clauses (e) and (g) of sub-section (1) of Section 26 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956, the said Regulations have a statutory force, in which case, the State Government and the Universities are bound to follow the service conditions as to 'age of superannuation enunciated in Annexure to the Regulations. Incidentally, learned Senior Counsel refers Entry-66 of List-I and Entry 25 of List-III. In short, the main say of the argument is the university education which is higher education and shall be covered by entry 66 of List I, and therefore, the regulations made by the UGC are binding as against the State Government and the Universities. No further scope is left for the option of the State Legislatures is the said field which is fully governed by the UGC pursuant to the powers conferred on it under Section 26 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956. Learned Senior Counsel also took me to the Circular letter dated 31.12.2008 emanating from Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of Higher Education, Government of India, whereunder, communication has been sent to the Secretary, University Grants Commission, conveying acceptance of the recommendations. The directions of the Government of India have been culminated in issuance of UGC Regulations, 2010. It is strenuously contended by the learned Senior Counsel that the UGC Regulations, 2010 have a statutory force and they are bound to be implemented by the State Government as well as the Universities, in which case, age of superannuation of the petitioners is to be treated as 65 years. In support of his submissions, learned Senior Counsel placed reliance on a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Osmania University Teachers Association (OVTA) v. Union of India, 2002 4 ALT 682. He also placed reliance on the judgments of various High Courts, such as High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, in WP(S) No. 363 of 2010 etc.; High Court of Judicature at Patna, in CWJC No. 11348 of 2010; and High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore. The copies of the said judgments have been placed on record. Learned Senior Counsel laid much emphasis on the following para, in the judgment of the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, in WP (S) No. 363 of 2010 etc.:
(3.) It is brought to my notice that the judgment of learned Single Judge in the above-referred case has been challenged before the Division Bench of the same Court in intra-Court appeal and the Division Bench set aside the judgment of the learned Single Judge and thereupon, the aggrieved party approached the Supreme Court by filing SLP (Civil) No(s).18766-18782/2010 and secured 'an order of status quo. It is contended by the learned Senior Counsel that the prescription of age of superannuation falls under the contours of co-ordination and determination of standards in institutions of higher education or research and scientific and technical, institutions enumerated in Entry 66 of List 1. In view of the (UGC Regulations, 2010 increasing the age of superannuation to the central Government funded universities, the same is applicable to the teachers in State universities. Learned Senior Counsel submits that there are number of vacancies in the cadre of Professors, Readers in the Universities and therefore, their continuation will in no way prejudice the claim of any person. Learned Senior Counsel refers Page No. 60 of the material papers in support of his submissions with regard to the number of vacancies available in University. Much emphasis has been laid by the learned Senior Counsel on the communication dated 11.5.2010 emanating from the Government of India, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of Higher Education. The paragraphs on which much emphasis has been laid in the above-referred communication is as hereunder: