Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
DEEPAK ROSHAN
Akhileshwar Pathak S/o Late Balbhadra Pathak – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
DEEPAK ROSHAN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner primarily challenging the order dated 18.03.2015 passed by the Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha (Retd.) Commission by reason of which the claim of the petitioner for correction of date of his absorption on the post of ‘Lecturer’ in the University has been rejected and further for grant of 5th and 6th pay revision which the petitioner claims to be entitled.
The petitioner further has prayed for quashing of the order dated 09.05.2015, whereby the petition preferred by the petitioner for recalling the order dated 18.03.2015 was rejected.
The petitioner has also prayed for quashing of the other consecutive order dated 18.12.2015, passed by the Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha (Retd.) Commission arising out of other petition for recalling the aforesaid order dated 18.03.2015 on the ground of retirement of one ‘Shambhu Nath Mishra’ which was also rejected.
Lastly, the petitioner has prayed for a direction upon the respondents to correct the date of absorption as well as grant benefits of 5th and 6th pay revision.
3. Earlier also, one writ petition being W.P.(S)
Eligibility for absorption and pay revisions requires documented qualifications and adherence to procedural norms; claims without proper recommendations or evidence are unvalid.
Finality of administrative decisions in educational governance ensures adherence to past judgments regarding teacher absorption without arbitrary delays or changes.
The university has exclusive authority over faculty absorption and regularization based on commission recommendations, and previous government notifications remain valid.
Absorption of university teachers requires both eligibility and availability of sanctioned posts; mere eligibility does not suffice.
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 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....
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
