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

2009 Supreme(All) 2581

AMITAVA LALA, SHISHIR KUMAR
OM SARAN TRIPATHI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Arvind Srivastava and Ashok Kr. Dubey for the Petitioner; R.B. Pradhan, S.C. for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

Honble Amitava Lala, J.—The petitioner has made this writ petition to direct the respondents to pay the salary and emoluments of the post of Principal to the petitioner when he has acted as Principal in the institution from the month of July, 2008 till date. He relied upon the judgments of this Bench dated 18th September, 2008 passed in C.M.W.P. No. 49172 of 2008 (Dr. V.K.Tiwari v. Director of Education and others).

2. Learned Standing Counsel has taken a different view in view of the judgment reported in 2007 (4) ESC 2261 (All)(DB), Daljeet Singh v. State of U.P. and others, to substantiate that there is distinction between a government servant who is promoted to higher post and who is discharging duties of the higher post on the exigencies. Mere discharge of such duties in the higher post cannot be treated as promotion, therefore, the person acted as adhoc Principal in the institution cannot get salary and emoluments of the regular Principal.

3. Mr. Arvind Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, has relied upon another Division Bench judgment reported in 1997 (1) ESC 164 (All), Km. Renu Tiwari and others v. Director, Higher Education, Allahabad (U.P.) an






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