OSMANIA UNIVERSITY versus V.S. MUTHURANGAM AND ORS.

Citation: [1997] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 499 · Decided: 08-07-1997 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: G.N. RAY · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

OSMANIA UNIVERSITY 
A 
v. 
V.S. MUTHURANGAM AND ORS. 
JULY 8, 1997 
[G.N. RAY AND K.T. THOMAS, JJ.) 
B 
Se1Vice Law: 
Osmania University Act, 1959-Section 38(1 }-Superannuation 
age--Osmania University fixing the age of supt!rannuation of the teaching staff C 
at 60 years-Whether it can be extended to non- teaching staff also-Held, 
yes. 
Words & Phrases-As far as possible'-Meaning of in the context of 
Section 38(1) of the Osmania University Act, 1959. 
Osmania University authorities refused to raise age of superannua· 
tion to 60 years by implementing the mandate of maintaining uniformity 
in the condition of service of all the salaried staff of the university under 
Section 38(1) of the Osmania University Act, 1959. The respondents, 
non-teaching staff of the University moved the High Court by filing writ 
-petitions claiming the age of superannuation at 60 years. Such claim was 
allowed by Single Judge of the High Court and the Division Bench of the 
High Court, on appeal, upheld the decision of the Single Judge. 
D 
E 
On appeal before the Supreme Court, the main contentions of the 
University were, (i) the expression, 'as far as possible' in Section 38(1) of F 
the Act, never intended that the terms and conditions of all the employees 
of the university should be absolutely same; (ii) University, in .principle, 
followed the conditions of service of the employees of the State Govern· 
ment; (iii) the age of superannuation at 60 years of the teaching staff was 
fixed as per the recommendation of the University Grants Commission; G 
(iv) University had followed the accepted policy to maintain the service 
conditions of its employees in the non- teaching department at par with 
the government employees of the State Government. 
On the other hand the Respondents contended that (i) there was no 
impracticability in bringing age of superannuation of the teaching and H 
499 
.. 
500 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997) SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 
A non-teaching staff of the university in view of Section 38(1) of the Act; and 
(ii) under Section 35A of the Act, the Government had the power to 
regulate the conditions of service of the teaching and the non-teaching staff 
of the affiliated colleges of the university, the government had allowed a 
different age of superannuation for the teaching and non- teaching staff of 
B the University and had not fixed the date of superannuation of non-teach-
ing staff at 58 years on the footing that the age of superannuation of the 
government employees in the State of Andhra Pradesh was 58 years. 
Dismissing the appeal, this Court 
C 
HELD : 1. The appellant University is justified in its contention that 
Section 38(1) of the Osmania University Act recognises flexibility and the 
expression 'as far as possible' inheres in it an inbuilt flexibility. [506-8] 
2. There was impelling necessity for the Appellant University to 
change the age of superannuation of the teaching staff in order to give effect 
D to the recommendations of the University Grants Commission. [506-8] 
3. The Appellant University will be justified within the ambit of 
Section 38(1) to introduce different conditions of service for different 
categories of employees if such different conditions become necessary for 
the exigency of the administration and if it is otherwise impracticable to 
E bring uniformity in the conditions of service of different categories of its 
employees. [506-8-D] 
F 
4. If uniform conditions of service for teaching and non- teaching 
staff of the University is not otherwise impracticable, the university is 
under an obligation to maintain such uniformity because of the mandate 
of Section 38(1) of the Act. [506-D-E] 
5. There is no compulsion under the law that the University is bound 
to maintain the same age of superannuation for its teaching and non-
teaching staff as is available to the employees of the State Government. 
G [506-E-F] 
6. Since there is no such statutory compulsion to maintain the age 
of superannuation of the teaching staff at par with government employees, 
the University has increased the age of superannuation of its teaching 
staff. Hence, University can easily raise the age of superannuation of the 
H non-teaching staff for bringing a parity in the service conditions of the 
;.
OSMANIAUNIVERSITY v. V.S.MUTHURANGAM[RAY,J.] 
501 
non-teaching staff for bringing a parity in the service conditions of the A 
salaried staff of the University by fulfilling the mandate under Section 
38(1) 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.