Back
S. K. MISHRA, SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
State of Jharkhand – Appellant
Versus
Lakahan Prasad Yadav, S/o. Late Geewan Gope – Respondent
ORDER :
(S.K. Mishra, J.)
1. In this Letters Patent Appeal, the State of Jharkhand has assailed the order passed by the learned Single Judge on 01.12.2020 in W.P.(S) No.6207 of 2018 whereby the direction was given to the State considering the reported case of State of Punjab v. B.K. Dhir [(2017) 9 SCC 337] and State of Punjab and Another v. Dharam Pal [(2017) 9 SCC 395] to pay the salary for the period the petitioner had worked on officiating capacity in pursuance of the order of the competent authority (Annexure-9 to the writ application).
2. The fact of the case is not disputed at this stage that the petitioner was appointed as Class-IV employee on 01.01.1993 on compassionate ground. He was posted at different places and discharged duty and office order dated 05.12.2001 was issued regarding deputation of his service.
It is also not disputed that the petitioner discharged duty of Typist and Office Assistant for some period but he was not given pay for the same.
3. Learned Single Judge relying upon the aforesaid two judgments allowed the application in part, though the learned Single Judge did not allow the prayer for promotion of the respondent-petitioner. However, learned Single Ju
The importance of judicial discipline and the binding effect of judgments, even if they have been set aside by a higher court, on the later Bench of coordinate jurisdiction.
Employees are entitled to receive salary for the period worked, as established in relevant case law.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power of review can only be exercised if provided under the Statute, and decisions should not be recalled unilaterally and arbitrarily onc....
The legal principle established in the judgment is that the policy prevailing at the time of appointment governs the entitlement to pay scale, and the court may consider similar treatment given by th....
The Resolution dated 16.8.1994 provided conditions for granting higher grade pay scale, and services not considered for fixing seniority could not be availed for earning the benefit of higher pay sca....
(1) Doctrine of delay and laches do not apply to a continuing cause of action.(2) Pay Scale – Parity – Financial implications and administrative convenience cannot override constitutional guarantees ....
The main legal point established is that the writ court must consider all relevant facts and circumstances, including delay and laches, and whether the grant of relief is against public policy or bar....
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
