LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/dr-j-vijayan-others-vs-the-state-of-kerala-others-20220802/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Civil · Reportable judgment

Dr. J. Vijayan & Others vs The State of Kerala & Others

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
2 August 2022
Case No.
Civil Appeal No. 5037 of 2022
Result
Dismissed
Bench
Indira Banerjee, J.K. Maheshwari
Citation
[2022] 6 S.C.R. 1027 : 2022 INSC 783
Supreme Court Reports [2022] 6 S.C.R. 1027 : 2022 INSC 783
Headnote

The University Grant Commission Act, 1956 – ss. 20, 26 – University Grants Commission (Minimum Qualifications for appointment of Teachers and Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and Other Measures for Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education) Regulations, 2010 (UGC Regulations, 2020) – Enhancement of retirement age – Adoption under UGC Regulations, 2020 – Liberty of the State to accept or follow the UGC Regulations – The Ministry of Human Resource Development framed the UGC Regulations, 2010 – The Government of Kerala adopted and implemented the UGC Regulations, 2010 – However, the State Government had not accepted the condition of enhancement of the retirement age of the teachers – Aggrieved by the failure of the State to enhance the retirement age of the appellants, the appellants filed a writ petition in the High Court – The Single Bench of the High Court dismissed the writ petition – The appeal was also dismissed by the Division Bench of the High Court – On appeal, held: Clause 6 of the order of the Government of Kerala, expressly stated that where there were any inconsistencies between Government order and UGC Regulations, the provisions of the Government order would over-ride the provisions of the UGC Regulations to the extent of such inconsistency – Later on, the UGC Regulations were also modified by an order of Ministry, whereby the regulation enhancing the age of superannuation to 65 years was treated as withdrawn – The Supreme Court unequivocally held in Jagdish Prasad Sharma that the State was not bound to accept or follow the UGC Regulations – Hence, there are no grounds to interfere with the concurrent findings of the Division Bench and the Single Bench of the High Court – Appeals dismissed – Constitution of India – Art. 309. Jagdish Prasad Sharma & Others v. State of Bihar & Others (2013) 8 SCC 633 : [2013] 11 SCR 696 – relied on.

P. Suseela & Ors. v. University Grants Commission & Ors. (2015) 8 SCC 129 : [2015] 5 SCR 643 – referred to.

Dr. Radha Krishnan Pillai v. State of Kerala & Others (W.P.(C) No.29253 of 2012 decided by High Court of Kerala) – referred to.

As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.

Full Judgment Text

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by INDIRA BANERJEE J. 1. Leave granted. 2. The University Grants Commission Act, 1956, hereinafter referred to as “the UGC Act”, was enacted to make provisions for the coordination and determination of standards in universities and for that purpose to establish a University Grants Commission, hereinafter referred to as “UGC”. 3. Section 20 of the UGC Act provides: “20. Directions by the Central Government – (1) In the discharge of its functions under this Act, the Commission shall be guided by such directions on questions of policy relating to nati
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

All SC judgments →