The Punjab and Haryana high court has given three months time to Centre to take a decision on enhancing retirement age of aided private school teachers and other employees from 58 to 60 years of age.
While disposing of clutch of pleas from multiple school teachers, the court said that in March 2023, UT administration has created expectation in the minds of teachers by writing to Centre that their retirement age be increased in Chandigarh from 58 years to 60. Now, there is an urgent need to take final decision one or another way, it added.
“The UT administration despite taking conscious decision is unable to enhance retirement age of teachers of government aided private schools on account of lack of decision of Union of India,” the bench of justice Jagmohan Bansal observed in a recent order.
The teachers had claimed that they should be allowed to remain in service till the age of 60 years because teachers of government schools in Chandigarh are allowed to remain in service till the age of 60 years from 2022. Prior to 2022, teachers of government schools were governed by rules applicable to employees of Punjab, where age of superannuation of school teachers is 58 years. However, UT administration in March 2022 notified Union Territory of Chandigarh (Conditions of Service) Rules and made Union of India rules applicable for city employees. As per rules of Union of India, age of superannuation of school teachers is 60 years as extended to government school teachers also in the city schools, they argued.
In the letter written to Centre in March 2023, UT recommended that privately aided schools employees’ retirement age be increased from 58 to 60 years. If the retirement age is increased from 58 years to 60 years, then total financial implication involved would be ₹1.9 crore for two-year period between 2022-24 in the case of seven such schools.
When the HC sought Centre’s response it informed the court that they have not received complete proposal from UT administration. On the other hand, UT had told the court that city administration has already forwarded its proposal to Centre.
“Be that as it may, the matter needs to be resolved. The Union of India and UT administration cannot deflect from their responsibility. They cannot shift burden on each other. They are bound to take conscious decision because absence of decision is leaving petitioners in dilemma,” the court observed directing that UT would send its proposal within one month and thereafter, Centre would take a decision within three months.
“The authorities shall keep in mind that UT administration has initiated proposal in March 2023 and a period of more than three years has already passed away,” the court further underlined.
