ACHHAIBAR MAURY versus STATE OF U.P. & ORS.

Citation: [2007] 13 S.C.R. 568 · Decided: 13-12-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
ACHHAIBAR MAURY A 
-;. 
v. 
STATE OF U.P. & ORS. 
DECEMBER 13, 2007 
B 
(S.B. SINHA AND HARJIT SINGH BEDI, JJ.] 
Service Law: 
c 
Uttar Pradesh Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules, 1981: 
r. 29-Age of superannuation of teacher-Claim regarding 
'session benefit '-HELD: Teacher having attained age of 
superannuation on 30th June, would not be entitled to the benefit of 
extended period-Fixing of cut-off date-Constitution of India, 1950-
D Articles 14 and 16-Administrative Law--Principles of natural justice. 
r · 
E 
Principles of natural justice-Superannuation-HELD: A person 
retires automatically on completion of age of superannuation-
Principles of natural justice have no application in such a case. 
The appellant was an Assistant Teacher in a primary school. His 
date of birth was 1. 7.1943. He was to superannuate on attaining the age 
of60 years. He claimed the 'session benefit' in terms of the proviso to 
r.29 of the Uttar Pradesh Basic Education (Teacher) Service Rules, 1981 
F contending that as he would superannuate on 1.7.2003, he would be 
entitled to the 'session benefit' and thus would continue till the end of 
the academic session (i.e. from July to 30th June). His writ petition and 
writ appeal having been dismissed, he filed the instant appeal. 
G 
H 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. A person attains a specified age on the day preceding 
the anniversary of his birthday. This has to be determined on the 
touchstone of statute operating in the field and in absence thereof by 
common law principle. (Para 10 and 12] [572-F; 573-C] 
568 
i 
-
ACHHAIBARMAURYAv. STATEOFU.P. 
569 
Prabhu Dayal Sesma v. State of Rajasthan & Anr., AIR (1986) SC A 
1948, relied on. 
Re Shurey Savory v. Shurey L. R., (1918) 1 Ch.263 and Rex v. Scoffin 
L.R., (1930) 1KB741, referred to. 
Halsbury 's Laws, 4th Edition Reissue, Page 209, referred to. 
B 
1.2. The terms and conditions of service of an Assistant Teacher 
are governed by the provisions ofUttar Pradesh Basic Education Act, 
1972 and the Uttar Pradesh Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules, 
1981 framed under sub-section (1) of Section 19 thereof. In terms of c 
Rule 29, a teacher is to retire on the date on which he completed 60 
years and, thus, on the last day of month when the person is born. 
[Para 7) [571-F, G] 
1.3. The benefit of getting an extended period of service must be D 
conferred by a statute. The Legislature is entitled to fix a cut off date. 
A cut off date fixed by a statute may not be struck down unless it is 
held to be arbitrary. What would, therefore, be an employee's last 
working date would depend on the wordings of the Rules. The question 
as to whether a teacher would obtain the benefit of extended period of E 
service upto 30th June of the next year will depend upon the situation 
as to whether the teacher retires on or after 1st July or not. In the instant 
case as the appellant was born on 1st July, 1943, he would retire on 30th 
June, 2003. [Para 8 and 9] [571-G; 572-A, B, CJ 
S. Benerjee v. Union of India & Ors., [1989] Supp.2 SCC 486, F 
distinguished. 
Khan Chandra Madhu v. Deputy Director of Education, 3rd Division, 
Bare illy & Ors., (1993) 2 UP LB EC 1128, disapproved. 
2. A person retires automatically on the day when he completes G 
the age of superannuation. Principles of natural justice, therefore, cannot 
be said to have any application in a case of this nature. The plea that 
the appellant was entitled to a hearing is not tenable as the matter 
relating to retirement from service depended upon the statutory 
H 
570 SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2007] 13 (Addi.) S.C.R. 
A provisions. [Para 10)(572-E, F] 
,. ~
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 5877 of 
2007. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 08.09.2006 of the High Court 
B of Judicature at Allahabad in Special Appeal No. (221) of2004. 
c 
S.C. Kushwaha and S.K. Nandy for the Appellant. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
S.B. SINHA, J. 1. Leave granted. 
2. Interpretation and application of the rule in regard to grant of 
benefit known as 'session' 'benefit' is the question involved in this appeal 
which arises out of a judgment and order dated 8.9 .2006 passed by a 
Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Special Appeal No.221 
D of2004. 
3. Appellant herein was born on 1st July, 1943. He was appointed 
as an Assistant Teacher on 21st July, 1975 in a primary school known as 
Kisan Poorva Madhyamik Vidyalay, Itally Gazna, District Jaunpur
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.