Iqbal Singh Sandhu vs Panjab University And Others

CWP-20529-2022 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

CWP-20529-2022


JUDGMENT
RESERVED
ON
JUDGMENT
PRONOUNCED
ON
OPERATIVE PART
PRONOUNCED OR
FULL
UPLOADED ON
19.08.2026 31.10.2026 FULL PRONOUNCED 31.10.2026


Iqbal Singh Sandhu ...Petitioner
Versus
Panjab University and others …Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHANDER DIMRI

Present: Mr. Sameer Sachdeva, Advocate
for the petitioner.

Mr. Indresh Goel, Advocate and
Mr. Akshay Goel, Advocate
for respondent No. 1, Panjab University, Chandigarh

Mr. Jastej Singh, Additional A.G., Punjab, with
Ms. Pooja Nayar Sharma, DAG, Punjab and
Mr. Akshay Kumar, AAG, Punjab.


ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
1. Seeking the issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the concerned respondent to
allow the petitioner to continue in service until the age of 65 years, with all consequential
benefits, as per Panjab University’s decision to adopt and implement the UGC Regulations,
2010, in line with the enhancement of the age of superannuation of the teaching staff of the
Central Universities as per the Scheme of MHRD, and pursuant to the UGC Regulations,
whereby the teaching staff, on retirement at the age of 60, stood entitled to be re-employed
until the age of 65, the petitioner had come up before this Court under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India by filing the present writ petition on Sep 06, 2022.
2. The petitioner was appointed as Principal of Panjab University Constituent College,
Sikhwala, Sri Muktsar Sahib, Punjab, and mentioned his date of birth as Nov 10, 1962.
3. The petitioner’s grievance was that the provisions of the Punjab Reorganization Act,
1966 provided that Panjab University is an Inter-State body Corporate, and is therefore
bound by the directions issued by the UGC and the Central Government. It is averred that
JYOTI
2026.10.31 12:31
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
1

CWP-20529-2022 2

interim orders have been passed in most matters, except in the cases of teachers of affiliated
colleges of PU situated in the Union Territory of Chandigarh, permitting them to continue
till the age of 65 years on a re-employment basis.
4. The Counsel for the petitioner referred to the University's budget and submitted that,
for centrally funded institutions, the UGC Regulations applied automatically. Since 92% of
Panjab University's funding came from the Central Government (Annexure P-3), he argued
that Panjab University was a centrally funded educational institution and contended that the
UGC Regulations 2010 would be automatically applicable to the University.
5. The respondents contended that the teachers’ service conditions were governed by
the Panjab University Regulations, which clearly provided that the age of superannuation
was 60 years, that the entitlement to continue in service extends until the age of
superannuation prescribed in such Regulations, and that no directions contrary thereto
could be issued by any relevant authority. Panjab University’s Counsel stated that the
aforementioned Regulations were binding, subject to Central Government approval. All the
respondents contended that in a series of judgments passed by the Courts, it had already
been held that the age of superannuation of the teachers concerned can be determined only
in terms of applicable statutory regulations, but the same is not applicable to the affiliated
colleges.
6. The Respondent University opposed the present petition and submitted that the
petitioner was allowed to continue in service on a re-employment basis vide order dated
August 22, 2016; however, as per the Regulations set out in Panjab University Calendar
Vol. III, 2019, re-employment is limited to academic activities, and no administrative duties
shall be assigned.
7. By order dated Sep 12, 2022, the notice was issued on the petition and the stay
application. Thereafter, by order dated Nov 21, 2022, the University was directed, in the
interim, to allow the petitioner to continue in service beyond the age of 60 on a re-
employment basis, subject to the conditions set forth in that order.
8. Subsequently, on Aug 05, 2025, the then Division Bench observed the following:
“We are informed that funding of the University is made
jointly by the Central Government and the State Government.
Circulars have earlier been issued in respect of Centrally
funded University in Higher Technical Education institutions
to increase the age of teaching staff to 65 years. We are,
therefore, of the view that the recommendations made for
amending the Regulation 17.3, by enhancing the age of
JYOTI
2026.10.31 12:31
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
2

CWP-20529-2022 3

superannuation to 65 years, requires consideration by the
Central Government.”
9. After that, by order dated Nov 14, 2025, the Division Bench [DB] modified the
interim order, clarifying that the continuation of the petitioner shall be limited to his
teaching capacity and not to the administrative capacity of the College principal. The
relevant portion of the said order is reproduced hereinafter-
‘ In the present case also, we deem it appropriate to
modify the earlier interim order dated 21.11.2022 and
following the order passed on 26.09.2025, provide that
the continuance of the appellant shall be only in his
teaching capacity and not in the administrative capacity
as Principal of the college.
The previous interim order dated 25.05.2023 passed by
this court is hereby modified accordingly.’
10. The present CWP-20529 of 2022 was tagged with LPA-1505-2016 and connected
matters; however, by order dated Jan 21, 2026, the present CWP-20529 of 2022 was de-
tagged from the group of cases.
11. In light of the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and the
respondents, the following questions of law arise for determination:
a. Whether Panjab University qualifies as a Central University or a centrally funded
institution, for the purpose of the present petition?
b. Whether the UGC Regulations 2010 are automatically applicable to Panjab Uni-
versity?
c. Whether the resolution passed by the Senate required the prior approval of the
Central Government and, if so, whether such prior approval had been obtained?
12. The University’s position appears to be that, under Section 2(b) of the Punjab
University Act, 1947, together with the Punjab Reorganization Act, 1966, the University
Grants Commission's regulations make the Central Government the appropriate authority.
13. It shall be relevant to refer to the following provisions of The Panjab University Act,
1947 (hereinafter referred to as the PU Act), amended to date,
i. §2. Interpretation.- In this act, unless there is any thing repugnant
in the subject or context;

ii. (a)"College" or "Affiliated College" includes any collegiate
institution affiliated to or maintained by the University;
JYOTI
2026.10.31 12:31
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
3

CWP-20529-2022 4

iii. (b)"The Government" means the Central Government;
iv. (c)"Regulation" means any regulation made by the Senate; and
v. (d)"The University" means the Panjab University.
vi. §5. Purposes of the University.- The University shall be
incorporated for the purposes, among others, of making provision
for imparting education in Arts, Letters, Science and the learned
professions and of furthering advancement of learning, the
prosecution of original research, with power to appoint University
Professors, Readers, and Lecturers, to hold and manage
educational endowments, to erect, equip and maintain University
colleges, libraries, laboratories and museums, to make regulations
relating to the residence and conduct of students and to do all such
acts as tend to promote study and research.
vii. §4. Incorporation of the University.- The University shall be a body
corporate known by the name of the Panjab University having
perpetual succession and a common seal, with power to acquire
and hold property, movable and immovable, to transfer the same,
to contract, and to do all other things necessary for the purpose of
its constitution and may sue in, or be used by, its corporate name.
viii. §8. Body Corporate.- Subject to the provisions of this Act, the
Supreme authority of the University shall be vested in the Senate
which shall consist of the -(a)Chancellor,(b)Vice-Chancellor,(c)Ex-
officio Fellows, and(d)Ordinary Fellows.
ix. §11. Senate. (1)Omitted by Punjab Act 9 of 1956.(2)The Senate
shall have the entire management of, and superintendence over the
affairs, concerns and property of the University and shall provide
for that management, and exercise that superintendence in
accordance with the statutes, rules and regulations for the time
being in force.(3)No act done by the University shall be deemed to
be invalid merely by reasons of any vacancy among either class of
elected Ordinary Fellows, or by reason of the total number of
Ordinary Fellows, or of members of the profession of education to
be included among Ordinary Fellows, being less than the minimum
prescribed by this Act.(4)Omitted by Punjab Act 9 of 1956.
x. §20. Syndicate. (1) The Executive Government of the University
shall be vested in the Syndicate which shall consist of :-(a)the Vice-
Chancellor as Chairman; (b)The Director of Public Instruction,
Punjab; and (ba)The Director of Public Instruction, Chandigarh.
(c)Not less than twelve or more than fifteen Ex-officio or Ordinary
Fellow elected by the Faculties in such manner and for such period
as may be prescribed by the regulations.
xi. (5) The Syndicate may make such rules, not inconsistent with the
provisions of this Act and the Regulations, as they may deem
necessary for carrying on the executive Government of the
University as specified in Sub-Section (1).

xii. §31(1). The Senate, with the sanction of the Government may, from
time to time, make regulations consistent with this Act to provide
for all matters relating to the University.
JYOTI
2026.10.31 12:31
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
4

CWP-20529-2022 5

14. At the time the 1947 Act was enacted, the University's area of operation extended to
the then State of Punjab. It included areas that now form part of the Union Territory of
Chandigarh, as well as Haryana and Himachal Pradesh.
15. Panjab University was initially established as a State University, but after the
promulgation of Act No. 31 of 1966, it (Panjab University) became an inter-State body
corporate that must function subject to directions issued by the Central Government from
time to time.
16. The Parliament enacted the Punjab Reorganization Act, 1966, vide Act No. 31 of
1966. Clause 2(m) of the definition clause and Section 72 are as follows:
i. (m) “successor State”, in relation to the existing State of
Punjab, means the State of Punjab or Haryana, and includes also
the Union in relation to the Union territory of Chandigarh and the
transferred territory.
ii. §72. General provisions as to statutory corporations. – (1)
Save as otherwise expressly provided by the foregoing provisions
of this Part, where any body corporate constituted under a Central
Act, State Act or Provincial Act for the existing State of Punjab or
any part thereof serves the needs of the successor States or has, by
virtue of the provisions of Part-II, become an inter-State body
corporate, then, the body corporate shall, on and from the
appointed day, continue to function and operate in those areas in
respect of which it was functioning and operating immediately
before that day, subject to such directions as may from time to time
be issued by the Central Government, until other provisions is
made by law in respect of the said body corporate.
iii. (2) Any direction issued by the Central Government under Sub-
Section (1) in respect of any body corporate may include a
direction that any law by which the said body corporate is
governed shall, in its application to that body corporate, have
effect, subject to such exceptions and modifications as may be
specified in the direction.
iv. (3) For the removal of doubt it is hereby declared that the
provisions of this section shall apply also to the Panjab University
constituted under the Panjab University Act, 1947, the Punjab
Agricultural University constituted under the Punjab Agricultural
University Act, 1961, and the Board constituted under the
provisions of Part III of the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925.
v. (4) For the purpose of giving effect to the provision of this section
in so far as it relates to the Panjab University and the Punjab
Agricultural University referred to in Sub-Section (3) the successor
States shall make such grants as the Central Government may,
from time to time, by order, determine.
17. Sub-section (1) of Section 72 of the Act of 1966 makes it clear that Panjab University
is now an inter-State body under the provisions of Act No. 31 of 1966.
JYOTI
2026.10.31 12:31
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
5

CWP-20529-2022 6

18. Section 72(3) of the Act No. 31 of 1966 also provides that the provisions of Section
72 of the Act of 1966 shall apply to the Panjab University. Sub-section (4) of Section 72 of
the Act of 1966 provides that, to give effect to the provisions of Section 72, the successor
States shall make such grants as the Central Government may, from time to time, by order,
determine.
19. In Dr. A.C. Julka and Ors vs. Punjab University and Ors. (2009) 1 SCT 64 ,
PHHC, Oct 31, 2008 , it is held as follows:
…In the instant case Panjab University, which was a creation of the State Act,
namely, Panjab University Act, 1947, would be squarely governed by Section 72 (1)
of the Reorganization Act, 1966, and therefore, would be an Inter-State Body
Corporate. Section 72 (3) further alleviates any doubt in this respect by declaring
that provisions of this Section would apply to Panjab University constituted under
the Panjab University Act, 1947. Sub Section 4 of the above Section only gives a
power to the Central Government to determine the grant to be met by the successor
States in respect of Panjab University. However, merely the fact that this power has
been granted to the Central Government, would not lead to an inference that the
Panjab University is a Central University. We are not impressed by the argument of
the counsel for the petitioners that since Sub Section 2 (b) of the Panjab University
Act provides that the appropriate Government for the purposes of the Act, would be
Central Government, Panjab University should be deemed to be a Central
University. Merely because the appropriate Government for the purposes of the
Panjab University Act is Central Government and the approval of the Government
is required for carrying out various functions of the University, would not, in our
view, lead to a conclusion that Panjab University is a Central University. (pp.
16,17).

20. In Prof. S.S. Bindra and Ors vs. The State of Punjab and Ors (2011) 3 SCT 291 ,
PHHC, March 04, 2011 , it is held as follows:
[22] The Punjab University is not a Central university as already held by this Court
in Dr. A.C. Jhulka. It is also not a centrally funded university under any law, though
it has been stated that certain developments have taken place and the matter is yet to
be decided by the Central Government. As per statutory provisions of the Punjab
University Act, 1947 and the Punjab Reorganization Act, 1966, the University can-
not be treated as a Central university or the centrally funded university. If the Cen-
tral Government accepts the Punjab University to be centrally funded, the scheme
for revision of age of superannuation may become applicable. Till such a decision is
taken, the scheme cannot be held to have become applicable. The Panjab University
will, thus, stand on the same footing as other State universities. The questions is an-
swered accordingly.

21. In the light of the above, it is no longer res integra that Panjab University is not a
Central University nor a centrally funded institution. The University has not been
incorporated by any Union legislation and has a unique status as an Inter-State Body
Corporate, as per statutory provisions of the PU Act of 1947 and the Punjab Reorganisation
Act of 1966.
JYOTI
2026.10.31 12:31
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
6

CWP-20529-2022 7

22. Moreover, simply because the funding pattern of Panjab University is similar to that
of Central Universities, the same does not change its status from an Inter-State Body
Corporate to a centrally funded institution or a Central University.
23. Another limb of the petitioner’s argument is that the definition of a ‘Teacher’
includes a Principal, Director of Physical Education, Tutor, Demonstrator, Instructor and
Librarian in the service of a non-government college affiliated to this University; as per
clause (1) (ii) of Chapter VIII (E) of the PU Calendar Vol. I of 2022. However, as per the
official website of Panjab University, the college in the present matter is a Constituent
College of Panjab University and not a non-government affiliated college; thus, the above-
mentioned regulation shall not be applicable.
24. In Jagdish Prasad Sharma and Ors vs. State of Bihar and Ors, Civil Appeal No. 5527
of 2013, [2013] 11 S.C.R. 696, 2013 INSC 475, the hon’ble Supreme Court holds,
…There being no compulsion to accept and/or adopt the said scheme, the States are
free to decide as to whether the scheme would be adopted by them or not. In our
view, there can be no automatic application of the recommendations made by the
Commission, without any conscious decision being taken by the State in this regard,
on account of the financial implications and other consequences attached to such a
decision. The case of those Petitioners who have claimed that they should be given
the benefit of the scheme dehors the responsibility attached thereto, must, therefore,
fail. [p.700 E-G].
25. Thus, it has been categorically held that the scheme regarding revision of pay scales
and enhancement of age of superannuation formulated by the UGC cannot be automatically
applicable to State-run institutions; and the discretion as to whether the scheme shall be
adopted or not lies with the State. Therefore, the contention of the petitioner that the UGC
Regulations 2010 would be applicable automatically, claiming Panjab University to be a
Central University, is misconceived and rejected.
26. The amended Section 2(b) of the 1947 Act defines “the Government” as the Central
Government. The Central Government appoints the University’s Chancellor by notification
in the Gazette of India. The Vice President of India serves as the University’s Chancellor.
27. With the sanction of the Government, the Regulations have been framed in the
exercise of powers conferred on the Senate. Chapter VI (A), Volume-1 of the Panjab
University Calendar contains Regulation 17.3, which provides that the age of
superannuation is 60 years.
28. The Central Government, through the Department of Higher Education, issued a
directive on March 23, 2007, that increased the age of superannuation from 62 to 65 years
for teaching positions in centrally funded institutions in higher and technical education.
Subsequently, on Dec 31, 2008, the Central Government notified the operation of the
JYOTI
2026.10.31 12:31
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
7

CWP-20529-2022 8

scheme revising the pay scales of teachers and equivalent cadres in universities and
colleges.
29. Thereafter, under Section 26 of the UGC Act 1956, the University Grants
Commission adopted the Central Government MHRD Scheme into the statutory UGC
Regulations 2010. The Senate of Panjab University duly adopted the UGC Regulations, and
sent a proposal to amend University Regulation 17.3 to raise the superannuation age for
teachers to 65 years to the Central Government for approval.
30. The Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of Higher Education,
Government of India, issued various circulars dated Dec 31, 2008, and May 11, 2010. The
UGC also framed the Regulations on June 30, 2010, prescribing the minimum
qualifications for teachers and other academic staff in universities and colleges.
31. The process for amending the Regulations of Panjab University was initiated based
on recommendations of the Regulation Committee to increase the age of superannuation for
teachers of Panjab University from 60 to 65 years. Regulation 17.3 was proposed to be
amended to prescribe the age of superannuation for all whole-time members of the
University's teaching staff, as well as for teachers in non-government colleges affiliated
with the University. Since the amendment to the Regulations requires the sanction of the
Government, i.e., the Central Government, the proposal was forwarded to the concerned
Ministry on Dec 26, 2011.
32. On Nov 20, 2023, the Government of India responded to the proposal to amend the
age of superannuation, stating as follows:
“Subject: Amendment in regulation concerning the age of
superannuation of university and college teachers-regd.
Sir,
I am directed to refer to your letter No. 500/VC/PU/DS dated 18th
May, 2023 on the subject mentioned above.
2. In this regard, it is informed that the above request of Panjab
University has been examined in this Ministry. Panjab University may
re-look into its proposal as per the extant rules of the State Govt. of
Punjab since the service conditions of Panjab University has parity
with Punjab Government Employees.”
33. The University responded to the aforesaid letter stating that Government for the
purposes of the Panjab University Act is the Central Government by vide Section 2(b) of
the Act of 1947. The Registrar of the University stated that the service conditions of
teachers of the University and its non-government affiliated colleges had no parity with
those of Punjab Government employees; consequently, the request was reiterated for
approval to amend Regulation 17.3 to enhance the age of superannuation.
JYOTI
2026.10.31 12:31
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
8

CWP-20529-2022 9

34. Given the above, whether the petitioner is on par with the teachers in the Panjab
University main campus, which is substantially funded by the Central Government,
whereas the teachers/principals of the constituent colleges were exclusively funded by the
Punjab Government, is not an issue that requires adjudication in this petition.
35. The Central Government responded to the letter of the University on May 28, 2024,
inviting certain additional information. The University responded to this letter on Dec 12,
2024. All aspects raised in the letter of the Central Government were replied to by the
University elaborately. The Central Government stated that revising the age of
superannuation to 65 years under the Regulations would not be feasible, as the Punjab
Government does not agree to it. However, under the statutory rules governing the
University, the appropriate Government must consider the proposal to amend the
Regulations. And so far, no decision of the appropriate Government, i.e., the Central
Government, has been placed on record to amend Regulation 17.3.
36. The statutory framework governing the University and the foregoing analysis make it
clear that the amendment to the Regulations of the University is to be made by the Senate,
with the sanction of the Government, i.e., the Central Government.
37. In Krishan Sharma vs. Panjab University and Ors., Civil Writ Petition 6179 of
2012 , a Division bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court observed as follows,
A perusal of the above scheme of Statute shows that the Regulation 17.3 has been
framed in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 31 of the Act. It could be
amended or varied, only with the sanction of the Government. The sanction on
behalf of Government is neither produced on record nor even said to be in existence
even during the course of arguments. Therefore, mere Resolution of the Senate/
Syndicate will not have the effect of superseding Regulation 17.3 of the
Regulations. (p.4)
38. Thus, this Court observed, noting that a mere resolution made by the Senate will not
supersede Regulation 17.3 unless it is brought in accordance with the procedure prescribed
under the PU Act, that is, with the sanction of the appropriate government, which is the
Central Government.
39. The Central Government has not taken any decision on the University's proposal to
amend Regulation 17.3, i.e., to increase the retirement age of employees to 65 years.
Therefore, all full-time members of the teaching staff of Punjab University are currently
attaining the age of superannuation at 60 and can apply for a further extension up to 65
years only on a re-employment basis for academic activities (teaching, research, etc.). As
per Regulation (x) of Chapter-IV University Calendar, Volume-III, 2019, Page-132,
Annexure R-1/2, it has been specifically stipulated that administrative duties shall not be
assigned to such an employee on re-employment.
JYOTI
2026.10.31 12:31
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
9

CWP-20529-2022 10

40. The Syndicate of Panjab University, the apex rule-making body, has, vide paragraph
2 dated 04.02.2023 (Annexure R-1/13), resolved as follows:
RESOLVED FURTHER: That the persons continuing beyond
the age of 60 years, be not given any administrative position and
financial powers and if someone is already enjoying this
benefit/powers, he/she be removed immediately.
41. Thus, in light of the aforementioned discussions, the following can be concluded-
a) Panjab University is not a central university or a centrally funded
institution. It is a unique inter-state body corporate under Section
72 of the Panjab Reorganisation Act, 1966.
b) The UGC Regulations, 2010 are not automatically applicable to
Panjab University; their adoption requires the discretion and
sanction of the appropriate government.
c) The resolution passed by the Senate to amend Regulation 17.3 does
not require the prior sanction of the Central Government, but it is
subject to sanction of the Central Government.
d) However, such sanction has not been obtained till date and is
awaited.
42. Furthermore, as per Annexure R-1/7, Panjab University had appointed Dr. Baljinder
Kaur as Principal and Chief Coordinator of the Panjab University Constituent College,
Sikhavala. The petitioner was directed to hand over the charge to her because he was not
ready to demit his office. The petitioner has not impleaded Dr. Baljinder Kaur as a
necessary party, even though valuable rights have accrued in her favor.
43. Thus, we must note that the petitioner never amended his petition to implead the
current incumbent of the principal’s seat as a respondent. On this ground alone, the
petitioner's claim to continue as Principal is legally unsustainable due to the non-joinder of
the necessary party.
44. The petitioner does not have any legal right validated by any regulation of Panjab
University to claim the post of principal for perpetuity. The petitioner's only grievance is
that administrative duties have not been assigned to him, which suggests that he wants to
stick to the chair of the principal, whereas a teacher's primary duty is to impart education to
students.
JYOTI
2026.10.31 12:31
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
10

CWP-20529-2022 11

45. Even assuming the petitioner held a legitimate expectation to continue in an
administrative capacity by virtue of past practice, such expectation does not ripen into an
enforceable right where it conflicts with a past policy decision of the university’s apex body
(Syndicate resolution dated 04.02.2023). A legitimate expectation can be overridden by a
reasoned policy change, and the syndicate’s resolution constitutes precisely on such a
reasoned basis.
46. Regulation 17.3 cannot be amended without Central Government sanction; a senate
resolution alone is insufficient. The proposal has been pending since Dec 26, 2011, without
final disposal, and that unexplained and prolonged inaction by the appropriate Government
on a statutory proposal warrants expeditious consideration.
47. Any order passed without waiting for the decision to be taken by the Center would
lead to multiplicity of litigation, upsetting the settled situation and hamper the smooth
functioning of the administration of the college at this stage.
48. Given the above, there are no merits in the writ petition and the same is dismissed.

(ANOOP CHITKARA)
JUDGE



(RAMESH CHANDER DIMRI)
JUDGE

Oct 31, 2026
Anju rani


Whether speaking/reasoned YES
Whether reportable NO

JYOTI
2026.10.31 12:31
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
11