P.J. Dharmaraj vs Church of South India & Ors.

Held: Not called for – If the State Government itself has not adopted the amended regulations, the same cannot be applicable to the CSIIT – Even CSIIT has not determined the age of retirement of teachers to be 65 years – Merely because the UGC and AICTE regulations were subsequently amended in 2010 and the age of superannuation for teachers in Technical Institutions was increased to sixty-five years, the same benefit would not automatically extend to the appellant – Government of Andhra Pradesh (now Telangana) decided to not adopt the amendment increasing the age of superannuation to sixty-five in their universities or colleges – Respondent No.2 Institute is a self-financing, Minority Educational Institution administered by the respondent No.1, and is neither run nor funded by Central Government – Regulations governing the age of superannuation throughout the State, the JNT University and its affiliated colleges including CSIIT is sixty years of age and thus, when the teachers of the University are only to continue up to the age of sixty years, the appellant cannot be given special consideration – Teachers of CSIIT cannot have their age of retirement more than that of the teachers of the affiliating University – It would create a serious anomaly, discrimination and inequality – After the appellant was given his notice for superannuation, he continued to make representations for retiral benefits, which shows that the appellant accepted his retirement at the age of sixty – Also, the appellant not a teacher and was only involved in administrative work with CSIIT – Appellant not led any evidence to prove that he qualifies as a teacher after becoming Director – AICTE and UGC regulations are applicable only to those who qualify as teachers and are discharging classroom teaching duties – Furthermore, the appellant has already retired, and respondent No.4 appointed in place of the appellant, is discharging his duties as Director. [Paras 9, 10]