The petitioner-librarian, Sadhana Bhardwaj, filed an application at the tribunal against the Department of Technical Education, Chandigarh, requesting an extension of her service till 62 years of age. Bhardwaj, through her counsel, Raj Kumar Sharma, cited AICTE regulations (2010, amended in 2019), UGC norms, and previous judgments favouring librarians in higher education institutions. Her counsel argued that librarians are classified as academic staff under these regulations and should retire at 62 instead of 60. Bhardwaj also pointed out other similarly placed individuals in Chandigarh have been granted service continuation, alleging that denying her the same is discriminatory. She further argued that delays in finalising recruitment rules since 2009 should not impact her rights.

The Chandigarh Administration, represented by Senior Standing Counsel Arvind Moudgil, opposing Bhardwaj’s claim, argued that as per existing Chandigarh Central Polytechnic Service (Group ‘C’) Recruitment Rules, 2001, and DoPT guidelines, the retirement age for government employees remains 60 years. Since the librarian’s post has not been officially upgraded from Group ‘C’ to Group ‘A’, UGC/AICTE norms on retirement do not apply.

After hearing arguments, the CAT declined to grant interim relief, stating that the applicant’s post has not yet been upgraded and the service rules in force currently mandate retirement at 60 years. It directed respondents to submit an update on the status of draft recruitment rules by the next hearing in April.