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

2009 Supreme(Pat) 672

J.B.KOSHY, RAVI RANJAN
State Of Bihar – Appellant
Versus
Poonam Sharma – Respondent


JUDGEMENT

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The writ petitioners were appointed on the posts of Nagar Shikshak. But, later the services of the petitioners were terminated on the ground that Prathama degree obtained from the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan (Hindi University), Allahabad, is not a recognised degree for the purpose of qualification.

3. The learned Single Judge of this Court held that the aforesaid degree was recognised up to 31.12.1987 on the basis of Annexure-2 attached to the writ petition. There is no challenge yet to this. Admittedly, the writ petitioners got degrees in 1987 much before expiry of the recognition of the period, as referred to above, therefore, the order of termination of the services of the writ petitioners is illegal.

4. We agree with the reasoning of the learned Single Judge.

5. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Letters Patent Appeal is dismissed.

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