Back
B. R. GAVAI, K. VINOD CHANDRAN
Rajesh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Jharkhand – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. jurisdiction and procedural history of the appeal. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. factual background of the appellant's employment and termination. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. arguments regarding eligibility for appointment. (Para 17 , 18) |
| 4. court's observations on eligibility and procedural errors. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 5. ruling on reinstatement and lack of applicability as precedent. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 6. resolution of pending applications. (Para 33) |
JUDGMENT :
B.R. GAVAI, CJI.
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal challenges the judgment and order dated 14th May, 2024 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi in Letters Patent Appeal No. 398 of 2023 thereby dismissing the appeal filed by the present appellant. By the said judgment, the Division Bench of the High Court upheld the judgment and order dated 19th April, 2023 passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court in W.P.(S) No. 3391 of 2020, whereby the learned Single Judge had dismissed the writ petition preferred by the appellant.
3. This appeal arises out of peculiar facts and circumstances.
4. The Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission issued an a
Administrative errors should not penalize an employee; reinstatement ordered despite eligibility issues based on peculiar circumstances.
The court established that the principle of parity in pay and allowances between government and minority school teachers is constitutionally mandated, and any deviation from this principle without a ....
The court held that a petitioner selected prior to a government resolution is entitled to regular pay-scale instead of a fixed salary, quashing the tribunal's contrary decision.
Candidates must fulfill requisite qualifications at the time of appointment; failure to do so renders the appointment void ab initio.
The court reaffirmed that judicial decisions regarding employment rights must be respected, and that grounds for termination or denial of appointment must be substantiated with valid evidence, partic....
Service Matter1 - Under Section 106 of the Schedule “F”, it is nowhere provided that if the appointment of Teacher is made in Non Granted School, then Teacher cannot be given an appointment in the gr....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the illegality of appointments made by the Panchayat Employment Committee, the entitlement of the writ petitioner to be offered appointment and con....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
