AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI
SHEELA RANI SINHA – Appellant
Versus
CHANCELLOR OF UNIVERSITIES – Respondent
Both the writ applications have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common ORDER :for the reason that the question of law coupled with the fact emerging from the pleadings are not at variance.
2. Both the petitioners were initially appointed on 4.7.1978 under what is known as Nalanda Mahila College, Biharsharif. At the relevant time it was under a Governing Body but subsequently the College in question was taken over by Magadh University. Petitioners thereafter have been transferred to other institutions depending upon their utility and the post being available in the Colleges concerned. Long time has gone past but their final status with regard to permanency, absorption and the benefits arising therefrom has not accrued to them because the University did not or could not take a decision under their understanding of law that the matter requires the approval of the Hon`ble Chancellor in this regard. Petitioners were supposed to have been appointed against the so-called 3rd and 4th sanctioned post for which recommendations are there but in absence of a final decision being taken at the level of the Hon'ble Chancellor, their status remains in a limbo. Procrastinat
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.