# Surendra Nath Singh v. D.D.U. Gorakhpur University and another - **Citation:** (2002) 2 ILRA 340 - **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad - **Decided:** 2002-03-14 - **Case number:** Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 14520 of 2000 - **Bench:** M. Katju, R. Tiwari - **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/surendra-nath-singh-v-d-d-u-gorakhpur-university-and-another-39831 - **Pages:** 2 ## Headnote Code of Criminal Procedure- section 482even if the allegations of the complaint are accepted as gospel truth the offence under sections 420 and 120-B I.P.C. is not made out. It was business transaction and the real dispute between the parties is regarding the payment of the goods taken. The dispute is purely of civil nature and the complaint has been filed only with malafide intention to harass the petitioners and to extract unlawful gain from them. (Held in para 10). The learned Magistrate has passed the order without application of mind and has not considered that no criminal offence is made out. He should remain very careful in summoning the accused persons in future at lease in cases where ## Text INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2002 340 ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CIVIL SIDE DATED: ALLAHABAD 14.03.2002 BEFORE THE HON'BLE M. KATJU, J. THE HON'BLE R. TIWARI, J. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 14520 of 2000 Surendra Nath Singh ...Petitioner Versus Deen Dayal Upadhyay Gorakhpur University and another ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Ashok Khare Sri Amrendra Singh Counsel for the Respondents: Sri Dilip Gupta S.C. Statute "2.(19) of U.P. State Universities Act, 1973- the Act does not make any distinction between a full time or part time teacher- after crossing the age of 60 years, a part time teacher can be continued only on contract basis, if there is no staff and if proper teacher is not selected. This can not give any right to the appointee to continue on the post after 60 years. (Held in para 7). After crossing the age of 60 year, a part time teacher can be continued only on contract basis, if there is no staff and if proper teacher is not selected. This can not give any right to the appointee to continue on the post after 60 years. A teacher has no right to continue after the age of 60 years. Only short time contract can be given after the age of 60 years without having any right to the post and such contract appointment may be terminated at any time. (Delivered by Hon'ble M. Katju, J.) 1. Heard Sri Ashok Khare learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Sri Dilip Gupta for the respondentUniversity. 2. The petitioner is a practising lawyer in the Civil Court, Gorakhpur and he was also appointed as a lecturer on purely adhoc basis in the Gorakhpur University for a period of 6 months by order dated 5.4.1989, Annexure-1 to the writ petition, on the fixed emolument of Rs.1100/- per month. This amount was subsequently increased to Rs.5000/- per month. 3. Under Statute 16.24 of the Gorakhpur University the retirement age of a teacher of the University is 60 years. Statue 16.24 states as follows: "16.24(1) Subject to the provisions of statutes 16.25 and 16.26, the age of superannuation of a teacher of the University governed by the new scale of pay shall be sixty years. (2) The age of superannuation of a teacher of the University not governed by the new scale of pay shall, subject to statute 16.25, be sixty years. (3) No extension in service beyond the age of superannuation shall be granted to any teacher after the date of commencement of these Statutes: 4. Thus, whether the teacher of the University is governed by the new scale of pay or not his retirement age shall be 60 years. 2 All] Surendra Nath Singh Vs. D.D.U. Gorakhpur University and another 341 5. A teacher is defined under the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973, as follows: "2.(19)"teacher of University" means a teacher employed by the University for imparting instruction and guiding or conducting research either in the University or in an Institute or in a constituent college maintained by the University." 6. The above definition in the Act does not make any distinction between a full time or part time teacher. Hence we do not agree with the contention of the petitioner that a part time teacher is entitled to continue beyond the age of retirement of 60 years. It will be strange to say that while a full time teacher will be retired at the age of 60 years a part time teacher will continue as long as he lives. 7. In our opinion, after crossing the age of 60 year, a part time teacher can be continued only on contract basis, if there is no staff and if proper teacher is not selected. This can not give any right to the appointee to continue on the post after 60 years. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that many part time teachers have been continued even after 60 years. In our opinion this was only on contract basis and such a teacher has no right to continue after the age of 60 years. Only short time contract can be given after the age of 60 years without having any right to the post and such contract appointment may be terminated at any time. 8. With these observations, the writ petition is dismissed. 9. Let a copy of this judgement be sent to the State Government and the Chancellor of the University for necessary action by the Registrar General of this Court. --------- ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL SIDE DATED: ALLAHABAD 03.04.2002 BEFORE THE HON'BLE B.K. RATHI, J. Criminal Misc. Application No.1385 of 2000 Nauratan Mal Daga and others ...Applicants Versus State of U.P. and another ...Opposite parties. Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri Shashi Kant Gupta Counsel for the Opposite parties: Sri Rajiv Gupta A.G.A. Code of Criminal Procedure- section 482even if the allegations of the complaint are accepted as gospel truth the offence under sections 420 and 120-B I.P.C. is not made out. It was business transaction and the real dispute between the parties is regarding the payment of the goods taken. The dispute is purely of civil nature and the complaint has been filed only with malafide intention to harass the petitioners and to extract unlawful gain from them. (Held in para 10). The learned Magistrate has passed the order without application of mind and has not considered that no criminal offence is made out. He should remain very careful in summoning the accused persons in future at lease in cases where