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

1996 Supreme(Pat) 629

SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA
Baidyanath Prasad Singh And Another – Appellant
Versus
Patna University – Respondent


Judgment

S.J.Mukhopadhaya, J.

1. In this writ petition, the main question arises as to whether the non-teaching employees of Universities of State of Bihar, including Patna University, are entitled for time-bound promotion or not as stipulated with respect to similarly situated Government of Bihars employees.

2. The writ petition was originally filed by the two petitioners for arrears of salary, in the revised scale of pay in view of second time bound promotion already granted in their favour. Further prayer was made for revised post retirement benefits on the basis of such order of second time bound promotion.

3. During the pendency of the writ petition, the respondent-State came out with one notification dated September 15, 1995, by which it was decided not to allow time bound promotion policy with respect to non-teaching employees of Universities. The petitioners have challenged the said Order No. 1494 issued vide notification dated September 15, 1995, by one amendment petition.

4. So far as the service history of the petitioners are concerned, it shows that the petitioners were appointed as L.D. Assistant (now known as Assistant) in the Patna University on January 4, 1961 and Ja



















































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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top