Judgment:
P. Ramakrishnam Raju, J.
1. This writ appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge made in Writ Petition No. 1935 of 1992 dated 26-4-1995.
2. The respondent joined as Instructor in manual carpentry in the second appellant College in the year 1954. As the respondent joined as Instructor he is entitled to continue in service till he attains the age of 60 years. As the appellants have not accepted the request of the respondent to continue him in service till he attains the age of 60 years, he filed the Writ Petition No. 1935 of 1992. However, the learned single Judge allowed the writ petition, against which the present writ appeal is filed.
3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that the first respondent was retired on 16-10-1969 after completing the age of 55 years and he filed the writ petition after a lapse of 23 years. Therefore, the writ petition is hopelessly belated. Be that as it may.
4. However, Sri G. Raghuram, the learned Senior Counsel argued that even otherwise, the respondent cannot answer the description of teacher. Section 2(m) of Osmania University Act, 1959 defines 'Teacher' as follows:
'Teachers means Professors, Readers and Lecturers in a college and such other persons giving instructions in a college as may be declared by the statutory authority to be teachers'
Sub-section (n) reads as follows:-
'Teachers of the University means teachers appointed by the University to give instruction or guide research in the University and constitutent colleges.'
A reading of this section, according to the learned Senior Counsel clearly shows that only Professors, Readers and Lecturers in a College and such other persons giving instructions in a College who are declared as Teachers alone would come within the definition of Teachers.
5. Smt. M. Bhaskara Lakshmi, the learned counsel for the respondent submits that as per the said definition, Teachers of the University means Teachers appointed by Appellant-University to give instructions or guide Research in the University and Constituent Colleges; inasmuch as the respondent is giving instructions in the constituent Colleges, he answers the definition of Teachers. We are afraid we cannot accept this contention. The definition of Teachers clearly shows that apart from Professor, Reader and Lecturer any other person or persons giving instructions so declared as Teachers alone can come within the definition of Teachers. Therefore, persons other than Professors, Readers or Lecturers cannot be brought within the definition of Teachers unless they are giving instructions and until they are so declared as Teachers. On a conjoint reading of these definitions, 'Teachers'. 'Teachers of the University', it is dear' that a person to be brought within the definition of Teacher must be a Professor, Reader or Lecturer or any person giving instructions if he is so declared. Therefore every person who gives instructions cannot be brought within the sweep of Teacher. Even the definition of 'Teachers of University' means who answers the definition of Teacher Under Section 2(m) and appointed by the University to give instructions or guide Research in the University and the Constituent Colleges. Therefore, it is clear that the word teacher must answer the description of Section 2(m) which in turn clearly prescribes persons who are giving instructions other than Professors, Readers and Lecturers who are giving instructions must be so declared by the Statutory Authority.
6. In view of the above discussion, we are of the view that the respondent does not answer the definition of Teacher, and therefore, he cannot contend that he attains superannuation at 60 years. In view of the above finding, it is unnecessary for us to go into the question whether there are laches in filing the writ petition.
7. The Writ Appeal is therefore allowed, and the order of the learned single Judge is accordingly set-aside. No costs.