Holding

Inspecting staff are not on par with teaching staff and must retire compulsorily at the age of 58 years as prescribed by Rule 75; the higher retirement age of 60 years for teachers does not apply to them.

Summary

The Supreme Court examined whether the West Bengal inspecting staff in the Education Department were entitled to the same superannuation age of 60 years granted to teaching staff under Rule 75 of the West Bengal Service Rules. The State argued that inspecting staff are a distinct cadre with no statutory provision making them a feeder post to teachers, and therefore must retire at the standard age of 58 years. The respondents contended that long‑standing practice treated the two cadres as interchangeable, warranting parity in retirement age. The Court held that the statutory rules clearly prescribe a retirement age of 58 years for all government employees except those specifically exempted, and the notification extending the age to 60 years applies only to teachers, not to inspectors. Consequently, the appeal was allowed and the inspecting staff were ordered to retire at 58 years.

Issues considered

Whether the higher retirement age of 60 years granted to teaching staff under Rule 75 and a government notification extends to inspecting staff.
Whether inspecting staff constitute a feeder post or are interchangeable with teaching staff for purposes of superannuation.
Whether practice or isolated transfers can legitimize parity in retirement age between the two cadres.

Subjects

service lawsuperannuationretirement ageWest Bengal Service Rulesinspecting staffteaching staffstatutory interpretationfeeder post

Judgment

STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. A
v.
GOPAL CHANDRA PAUL AND ORS. ETC.

JULY 14, 1995

[K. RAMASWAMY AND B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.J B

Service Law :

West Bengal Sen1ice Rules-l'art I: Rule 75-Superannuation-58 years
in respect of Govemment employees-Higher age limit of 60 in respect of C
teaching staff-Inspecting staff-Whether entitled to higher retirement
age-Held: No.

Under Rule 75 of the West Bengal Service Rules • Part I, Government
servants other than class IV shall retire on attaining the age of 58 years,
with a proviso that it will not be applicable in cases where higher age-limit D
upto 60 years for retirement had been fixed by the Government. By notifica-
tion the age of superannuation of teaching staff was fixed at 60.

The Inspecting staff in the Education Department claimed parity
with the teaching staff in respect of the higher retirement age. The High
Court allowed the same, against which the State of West Bengal preferred E
the present appeal.

On behalf of the appellants, it was contended that since the inspect-
ing staff was neither a feeder post to• the teaching staff nor the rules
prescribed for transfer of inspecting staff to become member of the teach- F
ing staff, the Inspecting staff should be required to retire on their attaining
the age of 58 years.

The respondents contended that practice had grown that the teach-
ing staff and inspecting staff are interchangeable and in the absence of
material to the contrary, it must be deemed to have been admitted that the G
teaching staff and the inspecting staff are inter-changeable and hence
entitled to parity in respect of higher retirement age viz. 60 years.

Allowing the appeal, this Court

HELD : 1. Inspecting staff governed by the statutory rules are not H
141

....
142 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995) SUPP. 2 S.C.R.

A on par with the teaching staff. Therefore, they are rec1uired to retire
compulsorily on attaining the age of superannuation of 58 years and shall
retire in the afternoon of the last day of the month in which he/she attains
the age of 58 years. [1~7-D]

2. Statutory rules do not prescribe transfer of the inspecting staff or
B the teaching staff to the other service as a mode of recruitment nor is it a
feeder post for the other service. In other words, the teaching staff and
inspecting staff are two distinct and independent services and the two
streams never mingled at any stage. The qualifications, the mode of
recruitment and service conditions are separate. The cadres are distinct.
C The inspecting staff are entirely to look after the inspection of the schools
while the teaching staff are required to impart education to the students.
[146-D-E]
3. When statutory rule 75 expressly prescribes the maximum super-
annuathm of 58 years to all Government employees excluding the excepted
D class or classes and the teacher is one such class, an Inspector, a distinct
cadre, by no.stretch of imagination can be taken as a teacher. The second
proviso is an exception to rule 75 ·which enables the State Government to
grant the benefit by a notification and pursuant thereto the statutory
notification was issued prescribing superannuation of 60 years for a
teacher. Rule 75 is unequivocal and clear. Stray incidents of transfer by
E subordinate officers would not give legitimaC'y to claim parity at the stage
of superannuation. [146-G]

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 6191 of
1995 Etc. •

F From the Judgiµent and' Order dated 4.8.94 of the Calcutta High
Court in C.R. No. 1755 M(W) of 1989.

V.R. Reddy, Additional Solicitor General, Tapas Ray and H.K. Puri
for the Appellants.

G A.K. Sen, V.B. Joshi and G.S. Chatterjee for the Respondents.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

K. RAMASWAMY, J. Leave granted

H Shorn off procedural wrangles, the core question in these appeals is
STATE OFW.B. v. G.C. PAUL [K. RAMASWAMY, J.] 143

whether the superannuation at the age of 60 years available to the teaching A
staff of the Government schools of the Education Department of West
Bengal would stand extended to the inspecting staff of the said Depart-
ment. The learned single judge and Division Bench reached their decision
on intertransferability, at some stage of the teaching staff and the inspecting
staff, which position was not accepted by the State and held that the
B
inspecting staff would stand on parity with the teaching staff and thereby
the benefit of super annuation of 60 years would be applicable to the
inspecting staff. Rule 75 of the West Bengal Service Rules-Part I, (for
short, 'the Rules') in Chapter X provides superannuation of the govern-
ment employees other than a member of the group 'D' (Class-IV) service
who shall retire from service compulsorily with effect from the afternoon C
of the last date of the month in which the employee attains the age of 58
years. The second proviso thereto adumbrates an exception that "provided
further that the age for retirement as prescribed in this rule shall not be
applicable in cases where higher age-limit upto 60 years for retirement has
been fixed under any general or special orders of Government." In the D
notification No. 1995- Edu(A) 17A-1/81 dated October 1, 1981, it was stated
that "notwithstanding anything contained in the Rules, the date of compul-
sory retirement of a teacher of a Government Education Institution shall
be the date on which he attains the age of 60 years which was superseded
ultimately by notification No. 0426- Education dated May 29, 1990. Therein
the Governor, while extending the last date to file option by all categories E
of teaching staff of Government schools and Government Madrashas up to
June 4, 1990, stipulated thus:

"(i) The age of superannuation of teaching staff of Government
Schools and Madrashas, appointed on or after 1.1.86, is fixed at F
60 years.

(ii) The age of superannuation of teaching staff of Government
Schools and Government Madrashas, appointed prior to 1.1.86,
who elect to come over to the revised scale of pay shall be 60 years. G
They may, however, retain their old scale of pay under ROPA
Rules, 1981 to get the benefit of extension of services, on year to
year basis, upto 65 years subject to the condition that they are
physically fit and mentally alert. Such extension of service should
be sanctioned by the Competent Authorities and would be subject
to the result of the relevant case now sub-judice. H
144 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995) SUPP. 2 S.C.R.

A (iii) The teaching staff of Government School and Government
Madrashas, who had been enjoying the extensfon of service on year
to year basis on and from 1.1.86 to the date of issue of this order
may also come under the revised scale of pay provided they have
already retired on agree to retire on or before 4th June, 1990.
B
This order modifies the earlier order No. 81-Edn(B)/lM- 3/82
dated 31.3.86."

Thus, it would be clear that the age of superannuation of teaching
staff of Government Schools and Government Madarshas appointed prior
C to January 1, 1986, who elect to opt to the rules, shall be 60 years. This
would also be applicable to those teaching staff who had been enjoying the
extension of service of year to year basis on and from January 1, 1986 t~
the date of May 29, 1990 provided that tltey have already retired on 'r
agreeing to retire o~ or before June 4, 1990.* It is manifest that Rule 75 of
D the Rules would be applicable to all Government staff except Group 'D'
and employees covered by the notifiq1tion issued under the 2nd proviso.
The normal Rule of superannuatio!l of all Government servants except the
excepted class of employees is 58 year~. For the teaching staff, the super-
annuation is 60 years.

E The question is whether the inspecting staff is entitled to retire of
their attaining superannuation upto 60 years. The contention of Shri V.R.
Reddy, learned Additional Solicitor General, is that the service conditions
of the teaching staff and the inspecting staff are regulated by statuti)ry rules
issued under proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution. The teaching staff
F is neither a feeder post, nor transfer of inspecting staff as a teacher is a
mode of recruitment. The recruitment to the respective cadres is either by
direct recruitment or promotion from the specified feeder posts. Since the
inspecting staff is neither a feeder post to the teaching staff nor the rules
prescribe for transfer of inspecting staff to become a member of the
G teaching staff, the inspecting staff should be required to retire on their
attaining the age of 58 years. Shri AK. Sen, learned Senior counsel for
respondents, repelled the contention arguing that practice has grown that
the teaching staff and inspecting staff are interchangeable which position
was not controverted by the appellants either by filing an affidavit in
opposition in the High Court nor placed any contrary material in this
H Court. Thereby, it must be deemed to have been admitted that the teaching
STATE OFW.B. v. G.C. PAUL [K. RAMASWAMY, J.] 145

staff and the inspecting staff are interchangeable. On that premise, the A
inspecting staff stands on parity with the teaching staff. Thereby the in-
specting staff are entitled to retire on attaining the age of 60 years. We find
no force in the contention.

Admittedly, the Governor exercising the power under proviso to
Article 309 of the Constitution, issued statutory rules (Annex B of paper B
.. book) prescribing rules for recruitment to the posts of District Inspecto~
of Schools and Additional District Inspector of Schools in the West Bengal
Educational Service. The Method of recruitment is (i) by selection (direct
recruitment), departmental candidates being eligible to apply, or (i.i) by
promotion from the confirmed Assistant Inspector of Schools. Explanation: c
These posts shall be filled up by promotion and direct recruitment in the
ratio of 2:1. The Qualifications for direct recruitment are (i) A second class
Master's degree of a recognised University in India or an equivalent
degree, (ii) a degree in teaching of an Indian University or equivalent
degree, (iii) three years' experience of Inspection work or in teaching in a
school, (iv) ability to undertakes touring. (v) familiarity with modern out- D
look and method of school inspection. (vi) capacity for planning and
organisation. (vii) good power of expression in Bengali-spoken and written.

Similarly, on December 19, 1975, the Goyernor issued statutory rules
regulating recruitment to the posts of Head Master of Government High E
Schools in the West Bengal Senior Educational Service (Annex C of Paper
Book). The method of recruitment has been specified therein which is by
direct recruitment or by promotion from confirmed Headmasters in the
West Bengal Educational Service (Men's Branch) either by selection,
departmental candidates being eligible to apply. Similarly the ratio of 2:1
has been prescribed in direct recruitment. The qualifications for direct F
recruitment have been provided thus:

"Qualifications for direct recruitment

Essential:
G
(i) A second class Master's degree of a recognised University of
an equivalent degree.

(ii) a first class degree in Teaching and/or Education of a recog-
nised University or an equivalent degree, H
146 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1995) SUPP. 2 S.C.R.

A (iii) ten year teaching experience in recognised second schools,

(iv) capacity for developing corporate life and maintaining dis-
cipline in secondary schools,

(v) familiarity with the latest development in secondary education,
B and

(vi) good power of expression in Bengali-spoken and written.

Desirable:
-
c (i) A post-graduate degree in Education or an equivalent degree,
and

(ii) administrative experience."

It would thus be clear that the statutory rules do not prescribe
D transfer of the inspecting staff or the teaching staff to the other service as
a mode of recruitment nor is it a feeder post for the other service. In other
words, the teaching staff and inspecting staff are two distinct and inde-
pendent services and the two streams never mingled at any stage. The
· qualifications, the mode of recruitment and service conditions are separate.
The cadres are distinct. The inspecting staff are entirely to look after the
E
inspection of the schools while the teaching staff are required to impart
education to the students.

The question is whether the pollutant source, obviously maneuvered
at some stage without statutory amendments to the rules, can provide
F legitimacy and would form foundation to claim the benefit of superannua-
tion of 60 years? The answer is obvious. when statutory rule 75 expressly
prescribes the maximum superannuation of 58 years to all Government
employees excluding the excepted class or classes and the teacher is one
such class, an Inspector, a distinct cadre, by no stretch of imagination can
be taken as a teacher. The second proviso is an exception to rule 75 which
G enables the State Government to grant the benefit by a notification and
pursuant thereto the statutory notification was issued prescribing superan-
nuation of 60 years for a teacher. Rule 75 is unequivocal and clear. Stray
incidents of transfer by subordinate officers would not give legitimacy to
claim parity at the stage of superannuation. Giving countenance to such a
H contention breeds corruption, nepotism and favoritism.
STATEOFW.B. v. G.C.PAUL[K.RAMASWAMY,J.) 147

The High Court relied upon a judgment of a single Judge in which A
the Government had not filed counter and that judgment formed founda-
tion as precedent for later cases. The statutory rules were neither referred
to nor construed. Another judgment of the High Court of Delhi in which
a teacher appears to have been transferred to the inspecting staff, who,
when sought to be superannuated on attaining the age of 58 years, ques-
B
tioned the same. The High Court had given him the benefit of 60 years
since he was recruited as a teacher. Apart from the correctness of the
jurisdiction of the Delhi High Court to grant the relief to a teacher
government by the rules, the ratio therein has no application to the facts
and it cannot form the base to grant the relief of superannuation of 60 years
to the members of inspecting staff. c
We, therefore, hold that inspecting staff governed by the statutory
rules are not on par with the teaching staff. Therefore, they are required
to retire compulsorily on attaining the age of superannuation of 58 years
and shall retire in the afternoon of the last day of the month in which he/she
attains the age of 58 years. The appeals are accordingly allowed but in the D
circumstances without costs.

G.N. Appeals allowed.