MADHAVI LATA CHATURVEDI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed for a direction against the respondents to permit her to continue in service up to the age of 62 years with all consequential benefits.

(2.) THE facts in brief are these. The petitioner was appointed on 25. 11. 1970 as Upper Division Teacher in the Tribal Department of the State Government. On 7. 12. 1982 she was sent on deputation to another department of Woman and Child Development as Child development Project Officer (CDPO) under Integrated Child development Scheme (ICDS ). The petitioner was then promoted in her parent department on 21. 9. 1984 to the post of Lecturer. Later, her services were absorbed in the department of Woman and Child development on 24. 12. 1997 as Assistant Child Development Project officer where the age of retirement is 60 years. On her absorption in the Department of Woman and Child Development she lost her lien in the parent department where she was working as teacher. On 31. 8. 1998 the State Government issued a circular by which retirement age of Government teacher was enhanced from 60 to 62 years. Thereafter, the State Government also amended Rule 56 of the Fundamental Rules by Madhya Pradesh Act No. 27/1998 with effect from 7. 8. 1998 and enhanced the retirement age of every government teacher to 62 years. The petitioner was retired on attaining the age of 60 years according to rules of service applicable to the services in which she had been absorbed and working. Aggrieved by her retirement she has filed the present petition. According to the petitioner, since her lien was retained on the post of teacher in the parent department for more than 20 years, she falls within the meaning of teacher as explained in Rule 56 and, therefore, the respondents cannot retire her before she attains the age of 62 years.

(3.) THE respondents, who are officers of Woman and Child development Department, have denied in their return that the petitioner comes within the definition of teacher contained in the explanation to Rule 56. They have also stated that petitioner has no right to continue in service beyond 60 years of age.