Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN
Sanjeev Kumar Ishwar Son of Rambilash Ishwar – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's appointment details and process. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. validity of appointments under bihar state universities act. (Para 7 , 10) |
| 3. court's direction on prior approval necessity. (Para 9 , 21) |
| 4. details of the petitioner's appointment and the relevant laws surrounding educational staff. (Para 11) |
| 5. interpretation of section 35 regarding appointment approvals. (Para 12) |
| 6. interpretation of section 35 of the act regarding appointments. (Para 13 , 15) |
| 7. decision on the legality of the petitioner's appointment and action for regularization. (Para 22) |
| 8. court's order to regularize petitioner's service. (Para 23 , 24 , 25) |
JUDGMENT :
ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN, J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for seeking following reliefs:
i. For setting aside the order issued by the Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna contained in Memo No.914 dated 21.04.2022 under the signature of Director, Higher Education, whereby and where-under the proposal sent by the Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, (hereinafter referred to as 'University') for concurrence to the appointment of
A sanctioned post permits appointment without prior government approval; rejection of appointment was deemed arbitrary.
Once a post is sanctioned, prior approval from the State Government is not necessary for appointment; eligibility and suitability can be scrutinized post-appointment.
Appointments against sanctioned posts do not require prior approval from the State Government, allowing for post facto validation and regularization of service.
Section 57A(6) of the Bihar State Universities Act is inapplicable to teachers appointed after the stipulated date; University must process such appointments fairly.
The court reinforced that salaries must be paid to teachers based on regularized appointments, rejecting any arbitrary withholding by the State as per established constitutional rights, regardless of....
The court held that the eligibility for consideration in teaching appointments is confined to those appointed before a specific cutoff date, and the petitioners, appointed later, do not qualify.
Appointments in public service must adhere to the order of merit as recommended by the relevant authority, and back-door entries are impermissible.
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
