Patna : Patna High Court As per the definition of teacher in the Bihar State Universities (Amendment and Recognition) Act, 2012, the headmaster is not a non-teaching but a teaching employee and Patna University (Amendment and Validation) Act, 2012.
NS high Court has also ruled that all principals who were compelled to retire at the age of 62 years between 2012 and 2017 shall be deemed to continue in the office of principal till they attain the age of 65 years and all will be entitled consequent profitIncluding pay and emoluments as well as continuity in service.
a bench of Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah, which delivered the judgment on 8 October, has also directed that the recovery made by the concerned authorities from certain persons be immediately refunded.
The petitioner principals had to wait for at least four years for the final decision as the court on April 2, 2018 observed that the arguments under the heading ‘For Orders’ on April 9, 2018 are concluded and listed.
Army of lawyers including senior advocates Jitendra Singh, PK Shahi, Mahesh Narayan Parbat Harsh Singh, Abhinav Srivastava, Roshan, Namrata Mishra and several others represented the petitioners in the case.
The order, which went public on Sunday evening, brought major relief to over 20 principals, who were handed over retirement on attaining the age of 62 by May 18, 2017 instead of the actual retirement age of 65 years.
The Bihar State Universities Act, 1976 was amended and the 2012 Act came into force in which the word principal was absent from the definition of teacher. This Act was deemed to be effective from 5 October 1991, the day the UGC Regulations 1991 came into force.
“Teacher means a person holding the post of Professor/Professor, Reader and Lecturer of the University and such sanctioned posts only in the grade of Teacher in accordance with the rules issued by the UGC from time to time,” the definition reads.
The amendments were again made and the Bihar State Universities (Amendment) Act, 2017 was enacted and came into force on 18th May, 2017 with the word ‘Principal’ once again for clarity. The same subsequent changes were made in the Patna University (Amendment and Recognition) Act, 2012 and then in the Patna University (Amendment) Act, 2017.
The counsel for the petitioners had widely argued that the amendments in 2012 were made to synchronize the Acts with the 1991 guidelines of the UGC and further amendments in 2017 were done for clarity. He had also submitted that the state government had nowhere taken any cabinet decision or issued any other order to declare the principals as non-teaching employees.
After the inclusion of the word principal in the definition of teacher, the officials of the education department issued a communication to the university authorities, assuming that the principal had attained the age of 62 years or more as on May 18, 2017. Relieved that they were non-teaching employees from 2012 to 2017.
Subsequently, the affected principals moved the High Court in 2017 to quash the education department’s order treating principals retiring at the age of 62 as non-teaching employees.
NS high Court has also ruled that all principals who were compelled to retire at the age of 62 years between 2012 and 2017 shall be deemed to continue in the office of principal till they attain the age of 65 years and all will be entitled consequent profitIncluding pay and emoluments as well as continuity in service.
a bench of Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah, which delivered the judgment on 8 October, has also directed that the recovery made by the concerned authorities from certain persons be immediately refunded.
The petitioner principals had to wait for at least four years for the final decision as the court on April 2, 2018 observed that the arguments under the heading ‘For Orders’ on April 9, 2018 are concluded and listed.
Army of lawyers including senior advocates Jitendra Singh, PK Shahi, Mahesh Narayan Parbat Harsh Singh, Abhinav Srivastava, Roshan, Namrata Mishra and several others represented the petitioners in the case.
The order, which went public on Sunday evening, brought major relief to over 20 principals, who were handed over retirement on attaining the age of 62 by May 18, 2017 instead of the actual retirement age of 65 years.
The Bihar State Universities Act, 1976 was amended and the 2012 Act came into force in which the word principal was absent from the definition of teacher. This Act was deemed to be effective from 5 October 1991, the day the UGC Regulations 1991 came into force.
“Teacher means a person holding the post of Professor/Professor, Reader and Lecturer of the University and such sanctioned posts only in the grade of Teacher in accordance with the rules issued by the UGC from time to time,” the definition reads.
The amendments were again made and the Bihar State Universities (Amendment) Act, 2017 was enacted and came into force on 18th May, 2017 with the word ‘Principal’ once again for clarity. The same subsequent changes were made in the Patna University (Amendment and Recognition) Act, 2012 and then in the Patna University (Amendment) Act, 2017.
The counsel for the petitioners had widely argued that the amendments in 2012 were made to synchronize the Acts with the 1991 guidelines of the UGC and further amendments in 2017 were done for clarity. He had also submitted that the state government had nowhere taken any cabinet decision or issued any other order to declare the principals as non-teaching employees.
After the inclusion of the word principal in the definition of teacher, the officials of the education department issued a communication to the university authorities, assuming that the principal had attained the age of 62 years or more as on May 18, 2017. Relieved that they were non-teaching employees from 2012 to 2017.
Subsequently, the affected principals moved the High Court in 2017 to quash the education department’s order treating principals retiring at the age of 62 as non-teaching employees.
.