Back
N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR
Dakhin Dhaukakhana High School – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam – Respondent
Heard Mrs. R. Devi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Kaushik, learned Standing counsel for the Secondary Education Department appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5 and Mr. P. Nayak, learned Standing counsel for the Financial Department appearing for the Respondent No.4.
2. The present writ petition has been instituted by the Headmaster-cum-Secretary of Dakhin Dhakuakhana High School on behalf of the eligible serving teachers of the said school praying for a direction upon the respondent authorities for provincialization of their respective services w.e.f. 01.01.2013 in terms of the provisions of Assam Venture Educational Institutions (Provincialization of Services) Act, 2011 (for short “Act of 2011”).
3. The Petitioners in the writ petition has projected that the Dakhin Dhakuakhana High School was found to have satisfied the eligibility criteria as mandated under the said Act of 2011 for having the services of the serving teachers therein provincialzed, but the said school was let out from the purview of such consideration on account of interim directions passed by this Court in WP(C) No.6283/2012, filed by two serving teachers of th
The mandatory nature of Section 10(4) of the Assam Venture Educational Institutions (Provincialization of Services) Act, 2011 and the entitlement of serving teachers to have their cases considered un....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the obligation of the concerned authority to consider the provincialisation of services of eligible serving teachers under the relevant provisio....
The petitioner has a vested right for consideration of provincialization of services based on continuous service since 02.04.2010, despite erroneous submission by school authorities.
The court emphasized the importance of individual representations and the need for compliance with the provisions of the Assam Education (Provincialisation of Services of Teachers and Re-Organization....
The main legal point established is that the petitioner's case for provincialisation under the Act of 2011 did not attain finality as it was not considered and approved by the Government in accordanc....
The petitioner's entitlement to provincialisation under the Act of 2011 was not established, and he was directed to seek consideration under the Act of 2018.
The petitioner's entitlement to provincialisation of services was determined based on the procedural requirements and eligibility criteria outlined in the relevant Acts.
The entitlement for provincialisation under the relevant Acts of 2011 and 2017 is based on the service particulars and requirements specified in the Acts.
A court may review its previous order when subsequent authoritative judicial pronouncements confirm that the adjudication failed to recognize vested rights to service provincialisation, establishing ....
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
