Case Note & Summary
Three writ petitions were filed before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, seeking superannuation pension for teaching and non-teaching staff of non-government aided Ayurvedic and Social Work colleges. Writ Petition No. 5771 of 2011 was filed by four Ayurvedic colleges, with two employees intervening, demanding pension based on earlier court orders. Writ Petition No. 682 of 2012 was filed by an action group and several assistant professors from social work colleges, while Writ Petition No. 3277 of 2012 was filed by teaching and non-teaching staff of social work colleges. The background involved a long legal battle: in 1996, the High Court in earlier writ petitions had held that denial of pension to staff of aided Ayurvedic and Unani colleges violated Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and directed extension from 26.05.1981. The Supreme Court in 1997 upheld the finding of discrimination but set aside the date and allowed the State to implement the scheme in a phased manner. Following this, the State Government issued a Resolution on 27.06.2001 that did not extend the benefit to employees of private Ayurvedic and three Unani colleges and their hospitals. Contempt proceedings were initiated, and on 03.04.2006, the court disposed of the contempt petition based on the State's assurance that it would follow the court's order in letter and spirit. In the present petitions, Senior Advocate K.H. Deshpande argued that the right to pension had already been judicially recognized and that the 2001 Resolution must be set aside, and the benefit as per the Government Resolution dated 21.07.1983 must be extended. The court heard the parties and reserved judgment on May 06, 2013, with pronouncement on June 10, 2013. The provided extract does not contain the final decision or analysis of the court on the validity of the 2001 Resolution or the specific relief granted.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Equality and Non-Discrimination - Articles 14 and 16, Constitution of India - The Division Bench of the High Court in earlier writ petitions held that non-extension of the Pension and Gratuity Scheme to teaching and non-teaching staff of non-government aided Ayurvedic and Unani colleges was discriminatory; the Supreme Court upheld the finding but set aside the retrospective date and permitted phased implementation - This established the right to pension. (Paras 2-3) B) Administrative Law - Government Resolution - Denial of Benefits - The State Government Resolution dated 27.06.2001 did not extend pension benefits to employees of Ayurvedic private and three Unani private colleges and their hospitals, allegedly in breach of the earlier judicial declarations; the Contempt Petition was disposed of on the State's assurance to comply; the present petitions challenge that resolution and seek extension of benefits as per the 1983 scheme. (Paras 2-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Government Resolution dated 27.06.2001, which denies pension benefits to employees of private Ayurvedic and Unani colleges and their hospitals, is contrary to earlier judgments of the High Court and Supreme Court that recognized the right to pension under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
Law Points
- Denial of pension and gratuity scheme to teaching and non-teaching staff of non-government aided ayurvedic and unani colleges violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution
- Government Resolution of 2001 overlooking earlier judicial declarations is liable to be set aside
- Phased implementation as per Supreme Court direction cannot negate the right to pension.
