APHC010363242012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 5186/2012 Between: G. Sathavardhana Rao, and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND Union Of India and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. D GOVERDHANACHARY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION 2. HARINATH N (DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA) The Court made the following Order: There is no representation for the petitioners today. 2. The grievance in the writ petition is that the respondents are not extending the age of superannuation from 58 to 65 years as mandated by the University Grants Commission Regulations dated 30.06.2010. The petitioners were working as a teaching faculty in various colleges in the State. 2 3. The petitioners are being paid the University Grants Commission Scales. They claim that the age of superannuation should also be extended in accordance with the guidelines of the University Grants Commission and regulations of the University Grants Commission dated 30.06.2010. The present writ petition was filed by the petitioners when they were attaining the age of superannuation. 4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader, relying on the instructions, submitted that the 6th Central Pay Commission constituted by the Government of India for implementation of Revised University Grants Commission pay scales to the teachers working in Universities and Degree Colleges has been duly extended. It is also submitted that the University Grants Commission has recommended the current age of superannuation be maintained. He submitted that the age of superannuation was not enhanced for any of the teaching faculty and thus the request of the petitioners was not considered by the State. The Government has considered the extension of service up to two (02) years on a case-to-case basis only insofar as Medical Specialists and Scientists are concerned. As the petitioners do not follow under the said category, the case of the petitioners was not considered. 3 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Date: 25.02.2025 NKA 4 313 HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.5186 of 2012 Date: 25.02.2025 NKA