SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(SC) 782

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
HIMA KOHLI, RAJESH BINDAL, JJ.
Smt. Dulu Deka - Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Appeal No.4455 Of 2012
Decided On : 22-08-2023

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Pravir Choudhary, AOR Mr. Prince Arora, Adv. Mr. Venketa Balaji Kodavali, Adv. Mr. Gourav Chhabra, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, AOR Mr. Deepayan Dutta, Adv.

IMPORTANT POINT
Salary – Once appointment of appellant had been declared illegal and void ab initio, appellant had no legal right to continue in service and no claim for payment of salary could be made for any period.

Headnote:

Service Law – Salary – Non-payment – Appellant claimed that she was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in School – However, no appointment letter was issued to appellant – It is nowhere stated in appellant’s appointment letter that appointment was in pursuance of any advertisement issued or candidates had undergone any selection process for the same – All appointments made by District Elementary Education Officer were declared to be illegal and void ab initio by Director of Elementary Education – Appointment of appellant was also included therein – Once appointment of appellant had been declared illegal and void ab initio, and was cancelled by Director of Elementary Education, appellant could not legally continue in service thereafter, unless that cancellation order was set aside – Appellant had no legal right to continue in service and no claim for payment of salary could be made for any period – No reason to differ with concurrent findings of facts recorded by High Court – Appeal dismissed. (Paras 6, 7 and 8)

Facts of the case:

Writ petition was filed by the appellant in Gauhati High Court in the year 2008 praying for release of her salary from 12.03.2001 onwards. It was claimed that she was rendering service as an Assistant Teacher in Bengabari M.E. School and had not been paid any salary. The writ petition was dismissed by the Single Judge. The order was upheld in an intra-court appeal. Said orders are impugned in present appeal.

Findings of Court:

Even otherwise , it is difficult to believe that a person has been working for two decades without any salary. Even the writ petition was filed by her in the High Court in the year 2008, claiming salary from 12.03.2001 onwards i.e., seven years later.

Result : Appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

(Rajesh Bindal, J.)

1. The writ petition, 1[WP (C) No.595 of 2008], was filed by the appellant in the Gauhati High Court in the year 2008 praying for release of her salary from 12.03.2001 onwards. It was claimed that she was rendering service as an Assistant Teacher in Bengabari M.E. School and had not been paid any salary. The writ petition was dismissed, 2[Dated 08.09.2008] by the Single Judge. The order was upheld in an intra-court appeal 3[W.A. No.42 of 2009 Dated 08.01.2010]. The said orders are impugned in the present appeal.

2. The facts of the case as enumerated in the order passed by the High Court are that, on 28.12.1996 an advertisement was issued by the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, for filling up 7,500 posts of Assistant Teachers in M.E./M.V. Schools. The appellant claimed that she applied for the post and appeared for interview in July 1997. The selection list was not published by the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, because the Government of Assam imposed a ban on the appointments. After the ban was lifted, the Selection Committee for Udalguri Sub-Division (General Area) in its meeting held on 12.03.2001, recommended the appellant’s name with other candidates for appointment against vacancies in three Legislative Assembly Constituencies, namely, Dalgaon, Majbat and Udalguri. The appellant’s name appeared against the vacancies in the Udalguri Legislative Assembly Constituency. The appellant was appointed as Assistant Teacher in Bengabari M.E./M.V./M.E.M. School vide order dated 12.03.2001 issued by the District Elementary Education Officer, Mangaldoi, Darrang, on a fixed salary of Rs.2,000/-(Rupees Two Thousand) per month under the Central Government’s sponsored Scheme, namely, Operation Black Board Scheme. According to the appointment order, the term of the service was upto 31.03.2002. It is claimed by the appellant that she has been working in the said school since then, however, she has not been paid any salary. A direction was sought to the State to pay the salary to the appellant. However, the High Court did not find any merit in the submissions made.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the order passed by the High Court deserves to be set aside as the appellant cannot be made to work without payment of salary, which amounts to Begar, not permissible in law.

4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the appointment of the appellant itself was illegal. In 2001, the Director of Elementary Education, Assam conducted an enquiry into the matter and vide his order dated 18.10.2001, declared all the appointment (Total 509 teachers) including the appellant’s appointment, made by the then District Elementary Education Officer, Darrang, Mangaldoi as illegal and void ab initio, as all such appointments were made against non-existent posts. The aforesaid order was never challenged by the appellant. It was further submitted by the respondents, that the selection of the appellant, as claimed, was made against the vacancies in the Udalguri Legislative Assembly Constituency, however, she was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in Bengabari M.E./M.V./M.E.M. School by the District Elementary Education Officer, Darrang, Mangaldoi, which was beyond the Udalguri Legislative Assembly Constituency. Therefore, the appointment of the appellant beyond the Udalguri Legislative Assembly Constituency was invalid and in violation of the Rules, 4[Assam Elementary Education (Provincialisation) Rules, 1977]. There is no error in the orders passed by the High Court and the appeal deserves to be dismissed.

5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we do not find any error in the order passed by the learned Single Judge, as confirmed by the Division Bench of the High Court.

6. The appellant claimed that she was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in Bengabari M.E. School against the vacancies in Udalguri Legislative Assembly Constituency by the Sub-Divisional


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top