Back
M. GANGA RAO
Padmakar S/o. Chinnam Jaya Rao – Appellant
Versus
Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Higher Education Department – Respondent
ORDER :
The petitioners filed this writ petition seeking writ of mandamus by setting aside the impugned Memo No.42351/IE-II(1)/2004 Higher Education Department dated 02.01.2010 and the consequential proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 12.1.2010 which was served on 1.2.2010 to the petitioners.
2. The petitioner claims that the 1st, 3rd and 4th petitioners are appointed as Physical Directors in different Aided Colleges on 16.7.2002, 24.9.2003 and 28.5.2003 respectively pursuant to the Advertisement issued on 9.5.2002, 10.7.2003 and 29.5.2002 calling for applications to fill up the post of Physical Director (Aided post) duly prescribing qualifications, by the duly constituted selection committee as per the procedure. The 2nd petitioner was appointed as Librarian on 9.6.2003 pursuant to the Advertisement issued on 14.4.2003 calling for applications to fill up the post of Librarian (Aided post) duly prescribing qualifications by the duly constituted selection committee as per the procedure. The appointment of the petitioners 1, 3 and 4 as Physical Directors and petitioner No.2 as Librarian was approved by the Board of Intermediate Education on 05.06.2003 and 06.10.2003 in respect of P
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioner's appointment as Physical Director was not entitled to the benefit of certain government orders and acts, leading to the dismis....
Point of law; It is clearly clarified in this judgment also in line with the earlier judgments also that unless and until the original appointment is a “regular recruitment” in accordance with “the r....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appointment of the petitioner as a librarian was lawful and in accordance with the relevant government orders and recruitment rules.
Government Orders imposing bans on fresh appointments or restricting the approval of non-teaching staff in government institutions do not apply to sanctioned posts in private aided minority schools, ....
Appointments made with proper oversight and approval cannot be deemed illegal solely due to procedural irregularities, especially when no disciplinary actions have been taken against the appointees.
The court affirmed deemed approval for teacher appointments due to the respondent's failure to act within legal timelines and ruled that objections for rejection were legally invalid.
The court emphasized the need for a detailed enquiry into the appointment of the petitioners and highlighted the importance of compliance with rules for salary release and eligibility determination.
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
