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

2005 Supreme(Ker) 77

THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
Poornima – Appellant
Versus
Director of Public Instructions – Respondent


Judgment :-

Thottattil B. Radhakrishnan, J.

The petitioner and the 7th respondent were appointed as HSAs in a School under the 4th respondent Corporate Manager. The 7th respondent was appointed for the first time on 22.12.1999, for a spell from 22.12.1999 to 23.2.2000 and the first appointment of the petitioner was on 22.6.2000, for a spell from 22.6.2000 to 1.11.2000. It is stated that the appointment of the petitioner as above was approved by the competent statutory authority on 22.6.2000 while the question regarding the approval of the appointment of the 7th respondent as above continued to be undecided for quite some time. Ultimately, the statutory authority approved the appointment of the 7th respondent by order dated 20.3.2004.

2. Going by the relevant Rule in Chapter XIVA K.E.R., the approval of appointment of the 7th respondent granted as per order dt. 20.3.2004 will relate back to 22.12.1999 and the approved service of the petitioner will be from 22.6.2000. Therefore, it goes without saying that the 7th respondent had, to her credit, an earlier approved service than that of the petitioner.

3. By Ext.P5, the Director of Public Instructions disposed of the dispute between the p




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