Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
DEEPAK ROSHAN
Mahakant Jha, S/o. Nagendra Jha – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners' claims for absorption based on prior recommendations. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 2. respondents argue against petitioners' absorption claims. (Para 13) |
| 3. court affirms absorption claims based on historical decisions. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 4. court orders reliefs and benefits for petitioners. (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
JUDGMENT :
DEEPAK ROSHAN, J.
1. Heard Ld. Counsel for the parties.
2. Both these Writ Petitions having common prayer and issue were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
3. The Petitioners in both these Writ Petitions have commonly prayed for the following reliefs:
a. For issuance of an appropriate Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ (s), Order (s) or Direction (s) to the respondents to confirm the absorption of the petitioner on the post which is recommended prior to cut off date i.e 30.04.1986 and fully covered by the principle laid down by the Justice Agarwal Commission at Page-24-25 of VOL-1 of its report and on the sanctioned in terms of Government letter dated 18.12.1989 (181-C) which has been duly accepted by this Hon’ble Court in its Judgment of State of Bihar Vs. Bihar Rajy
The university has exclusive authority over faculty absorption and regularization based on commission recommendations, and previous government notifications remain valid.
Finality of administrative decisions in educational governance ensures adherence to past judgments regarding teacher absorption without arbitrary delays or changes.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the exclusive power and jurisdiction of the University in the matter of absorption of staff of constituent colleges, as provided in Section 4(1)(14....
Eligibility for absorption and pay revisions requires documented qualifications and adherence to procedural norms; claims without proper recommendations or evidence are unvalid.
The court ruled that the confirmation of a lecturer's absorption in an improper department is illegal, emphasizing the need for adherence to lawful procedures in educational employment.
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....
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
