G.N.MURTHY Vs. KAKATIYA UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petitioners, who are all non-teaching staff members, have all retired from the service of the 1st respondent - Kakatiya University on attaining the age of superannuation of 58 years on various dates. However, they seek a writ of mandamus to direct the respondent - University to treat the petitioners to have continued in service of the respondent University till they attained the age of 60 years and on that basis accord all consequential benefits including payment of salary and allowances as also terminal benefits, in accordance with law declared by the Supreme Court in the judgment rendered in CA No. 1107-08/1990 and Civil Appeal No. 641 of 1991.

(2.) The writ petitioners submit that they were initially recruited to the service of the Osmania University at Hyderabad. At that time, the Post-Graduate Centre at Warangal was not only affiliated, but was also under the direct administrative control of the Osmania University. But, subsequently, by the Kakatiya University Act, Act 44/1976, the Post Graduate Centre at Warangal has been constituted as a University. In accordance with sub-section (2) of Section 46 of the said Act, the entire establishment of the Post Graduate Centre at Warangal stood transferred to the newly constituted Kakatiya University. That is how the writ petitioners have come to function as non-teaching staff members of the 1st respondent - Kakatiya University ever since it came to be so constituted. Sub-section (3) of Section 46 of Kakatiya University Act accorded protection to the former Osmania University Employees, enablishing them to continue to hold the office or serve the newly constituted University on the same terms and conditions of employment, same tenure, rights and privileges as to pension and gratuity which were prevailing at the time of their transfer to Kakatiya University.

(3.) When the age of superannuation of non-teaching staff members of the Osmania University was fixed as 58 years, while that of the teachers of the Osmania University was fixed at 60 years, the said issue has been raised in a series of writ petitions instituted by the aggrieved parties in this court. Ultimately, the said lis was carried to Supreme Court by way of Civil Appeal No. 1107-08/1990. These Civil Appeals have been decided by the Supreme Court by a judgment dated 8.7.1997, (which was since Osmania University v. V.S.Muthrangam, 1997 AIR(SC) 2758) wherein the Supreme Court, found that apart from different scales of pay provided for each of the posts in the hierarchy of service in both teaching and non-teaching departments, the nature of service and performance of duties of the two are distinct and different. Therefore, there is an inherent difference in between both the streams viz., teaching and non-teaching staff of the same University. However, the Supreme Court went on to add that the University is under an obligation to maintain uniformity in the conditions of service of its employees as far as possible and that in that case, the University has not taken any decision that it is not practicable to maintain parity in the age of superannuation of both teaching and non-teaching staff.