The Petitioners humbly submit that, the UGC Regulation dated

18.07.2018 was formulated on the basis of the recommendation of the 7 th

Pay Commission, the salient features of the 7 th Pay Commission

Recommendation Para 5.12, 5.13, 9.3, 7.6, 9.3.3.3 are extracted herein

under –

The Central Government has accepted the recommendation of the Pay

Commission. The Ministry of Higher Education by means of Government

Order dated 02.11.2017 accepted the recommendation of the Pay

Commission and issued an Order. As per Clause-6 (4)(h) of the said

Government Order dated 02.11.2017, the age of superannuation

including the pay scale is mandatory one, once the recommendation is

accepted.

The UGC Regulations have been accepted by the State Government

except the age of superannuation by means of the Government Order

dated 19.06.1999, Clause-9 is ultra-virus the powers conferred under

the UGC Regulations dated 18.07.2018. The Copy of the Government

Order is produced herewith and marked as Annexure- .

GROUNDS

1. The Petitioners humbly submit that the Karnataka State

Legislature by bringing an Amendment Act 15 of 2019 to the Karnataka

State Universities Act 2000, extended the age of superannuation of UGC

to the Class Room Teachers of Constituent Colleges of Maharani Cluster

Universities. The Act 15 of 2019 which is an Amendment brought to the

Karnataka State Universities Act 2000. The Petitioners College is a

Constituent College of Mysore University. The 1 st Petitioner is a direct

employee of the University working as Profession in PG Department.

Thus on the Principle of Parity, they are entitled for a similar age benefit

of superannuation as provided under the Act 15 of 2019. This Hon’ble

Court after hearing both the parties in Maharani’s College case granted

an Interim Order not to relieve the services of the Petitioners – 15

Persons in one Batch and another single teacher on a question, the age

of retirement would be 60, 62 or 65 years. The Petitioners are entitled for

similar benefit on the Principle of Parity. Hence, the Petitioner is also

entitled for the benefit of the Act 15 of 2019, as both the Universities are

included under the Karnataka State Universities Act and the principle

laid down in the case of Dr. Jacob Thudipura Vs. The State of Madhya

Pradesh & Ors dated 21.04.2022 would clearly applicable to the facts of

the case. Hence, the age of superannuation of the Petitioners only at 65

years and the Petitioners are entitled to continue in their services.

2. This Hon’ble Court has granted Interim Orders not to relieve the

services inspite of superannuation either at the age of 60 or 62 and

continue services till the end of the academic year as per the University

Statute. The Petitioners are entitled for the similar benefit as under

Mysore University Statute, which is similar to Bengaluru and Mangaluru

University, where Interim Order was granted. Hence, at present

irrespective of the decision on the age of superannuation, the Petitioners

are entitled to continue the services till the end of the academic year on a

monthly pay as granted by this Hon’ble Court in number of cases as

stated above.

3. The UGC Regulation dated 18.07.2018 which is being applicable to

Universities, the age of superannuation shall be 65 years since the

Petitioners are getting UGC Pay Scale with 80% funds from the UGC and

20% from the State Government. Therefore, the Petitioners are entitled

for the said relief.

4. The Petitioners humbly submits that on the basis of the

recommendation of the 7th Pay Commission, the age of superannuation

shall be 65 years with a uniform throughout India. The relevant clause

reads as under –

………………………………………………………………………………………

5. The fixation of Pay Scale including acceptance of the

recommendation of the Pay Commission is an Executive Act. The

recommendations are not susceptible to the judicial review under Article

226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and therefore, the Petitioners

are entitled to approach this Hon’ble Court.

6. The Petitioners humbly submit that, based on the Principle of

Parity the Petitioners are entitled to continue services till the age of 65

years since the Act 15 of 2019 is one under Karnataka State University

Act 2000 and similar benefit is being denied to the Petitioners. Therefore,

the Petitioners are entitled to approach this Hon’ble Court.

GROUNDS FOR INTERIM RELIEF

7. The Petitioners humbly submit that, this Hon’ble Court in Writ

Petition filed in Maharani’s Constituent College granted Interim Order

not to relieve the services of the Petitioners and further to continue till

the question of age of retirement either as 60 or 62 or 65 to be decided by

recording a finding that there is a prima facie case in favour of the

Petitioners. An interim direction has been issued not to relieve the

services of the Petitioners. A copy of the said Interim Order dated ______

is produced herewith and marked as Annexure- . The Petitioners are

entitled for a similar relief

8. This Hon’ble Court in case of Bengaluru University and Mangaluru

University cases have passed an Interim Order and one such Interim

Orders is extracted herein under –

………………………………………………………………..

In view of these circumstances, pending the issue of the age of

superannuation, this Hon’ble Court directed that, the Petitioners shall

continue services till the end of the academic year along with the pay

protection and one such orders is extracted herein under and produced

herewith as Annexure- in the Writ Petition mentioned above.

……………………………………………………………………

9. The Petitioners are entitled for a similar relief. The Mysore

University is also provided that the continuance of the Teachers till the

end of academic year. Therefore, the Respondents may be directed not to

relieve the services of the Petitioners, as an Interim Order was passed in

the above cases and also in Dr. Prakash & Others Vs. State of Karnataka

in W.P. No. ___________ and Dr. Bhaskar & Others Vs. _________ in W.P.

No. ___________. Hence, the Petitioners are entitled for similar relief.

10. Once such an Interim Order is granted and the Petitioners are

similarly placed, the Petitioners are entitled for similar Interim Order as

held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Vishnu Traders Case 95 Supp (1) SCC

461, Para _____ . In view of the above circumstances, the Petitioners are

entitled for the Interim Order that the Petitioners shall continue the

services and shall not be relieved and pass any appropriate Interim

Order as deems fit by this Hon’ble Court during the pendency of the Writ

Petition to meet the ends of justice.

PRAYER
a) Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to continue the

services of the Petitioners till the Petitioners attain the age of 65

years in terms of Section 44(t) of Act 15 of 2019 on the Principle of

Parity. The State Legislature since extended the age of UGC to

Maharani’s Cluster University and Constituent Colleges, the similar

benefit is also extended to the Maharaja’s College Universities and

its Constituent Colleges since both Maharani and Maharaja’s

Colleges were established in the year 1960 by the then Maharaja;

b) Direct the Respondents to extend the age of superannuation as

provided under the UGC Regulation dated 18.07.2018 and further

extend the benefit of the 7th Pay Commission Recommendation in

terms of the Government Order dated 02.11.1017;

c) Direct the Respondents not to discriminate in the matters of

extending the age of superannuation, and not to discriminate among

the Classroom Teachers based on the place of working. If the

benefit is extended to one University Classroom Teachers under the

Karnataka State University Act of 2000, the same is applicable to all

the Classroom Teachers working in a College affiliated under the

Karnataka State Universities Act of 2000;

d) Direct the Respondents to continue services of the Petitioners till the

Petitioners attain the age of 65 years and accord all consequential

benefits and not to enforce any State law in this regard;

 e) Declare that any law made by the State Legislature including the

Government Order dated 19.06.2019 is void inoperative and the

same is unenforceable in view the regulation framed under the

Central Legislature; and

f) Pass any Interim Order or direction in the circumstances of the case

including the Order has to pass to meet the ends of justice.

INTERIM PRAYER

For the reasons stated supra, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased

to pass an Interim Order not to relief the services of the Petitioners, as

similar Interim Order was passed in W.P. No. ____________ and W.P. No.

___________ Lecturers working in Maharani’s College, Bengaluru and also

Dr. Prakash & Others Vs. State of Karnataka in W.P. No. ___________ and

Dr. Bhaskar & Others Vs. _________ in W.P. No. ___________; and

Pass any other similar Order not to relieve services of the Petitioners and

continue services of the Petitioners with the same Pay Scale and pass any

appropriate order or direction in the facts and circumstances of the case, in

the interest of justice and equity.