G LAKSHMANAN Vs. EXECUTIVE OFFICER TIRUMALATIRUPATI DEVASTHANAMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is seeking directions to the Respondents to fix the pension of the petitioner reckoning the age of superannuation of age of 60 years and to pay the pensionary benefits including the Gratuity, commuted, medical leave and encashment of leave, to fix the pay of the petitioner in the revised pay scales of 1986 and for direction to Respondents to extend the benefits of 10 years, 15 years and 22 years of selection grade scales.

(2.) The facts leading to the case are that the petitioner has appointed as Lecturer in Veena in SriVenkateswara College of Music and Dance, Tirupati on 17-10-1964. The U.G.C. scales have been implemented by the 1st Respondent Devasthanams from 1961 onwards, to 1966, and thereafter State Government Scales are paid. But however subsequently it was not implemented to the teaching staff in the Music College. It is submitted by the petitioner that all the rules and regulations of the University including the U.G.C. scales are adopted for appointment of teaching staff and the procedure for admitting the students is also being followed. The age of superannuation of teaching staff was 60 years. However, the petitioner was retired from service by orders dated 23-2-19.83 when he was only 56 years. The issue of reduction of age of retirement was considered by the Supreme Court and the reduction of superannuation was held to be illegal consequently the petitioner was inducted into service by orders dated 18-5-1985. But, however the Devasthanam sought to retire the petitioner on attaining the age of 58 years by memo dated 22-8-1985, thereupon the petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 5266/83. This court while admitting the Writ Petition directed the 1st Respondent - Devasthnam to continue the petitioner in service till he attains the age of 60 years. However, the petitioner retired from service on 31 -10-19 87 on attaining the age of 60 years. The pension of the petitioner has not been fixed so far and the pensionary benefits has not been paid. The petitioner was informed that if the petitioner submits option to settle his retirement benefits retiring at the age of retirement upto 58 years, he would be granted anticipatory pension. In view of the acute financial position of the petitioner, he was constrained to submit the option to enable him to get the anticipatory pension. However, the pension and other benefits were calculated taking the age of retirement at 58 years, when the petitioner is entitled to the pensionary benefits on the basis of the 60 years retirement. He has also not paid the commuted, medical leave. The petitioner further submits that he is entitled for the Special Grade and Special Promotion post in pursuance of the automatic advancement scheme introduced by the Government adopted by the Devasthanams.

(3.) Though number of claims are made by the petitioner in this Writ Petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner confines his contention only to the extent of pension and release of automatic advancement scheme.