Back
HARISH KUMAR
S. M. Mansoor Akhtar – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
Harish Kumar, J.—Learned counsel for the petitioners is permitted to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks from today.
2. Heard Mr. Ram Sagar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned AC to GP-23 for the State.
3. Two petitioners are seeking directions upon the respondents to ensure payment of their due salary for the period from 01.10.2018 to 30.09.2019 and from 01.01.2018 to 31.12.2019 respectively and also for payment of all other retiral/outstanding dues along with consequential benefits.
4. The short facts, which led to the filing of the present writ application is that in terms of the advertisement dated 17.01.1996, the petitioner no.1 was appointed as Assistant Teacher (English) vide letter dated 11.09.1999 (Annexure-1 to the writ application). Pursuant to the appointment letter, the petitioner no.1 submitted his joining in the said school on 13.09.1999.
5. The petitioner no.2 was appointed as Assistant Teacher (Math) by the Managing Committee of the High School, Mafi, Nalanda vide letter dated 19.10.1999 (Annexure-5 to the writ application) and he submitted his joining on 25.10.1999.
6. It would not be out
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.
Employees cannot be denied salary or retiral benefits for prior approved service due to later administrative inquiries questioning appointment validity.
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
