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

2012 Supreme(All) 8

KRISHNA MURARI
SHAKEEL AHMAD – Appellant
Versus
D. I. O. S. BASTI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
K. Shahi, Pradeep Kumar and U.N. Pandey for the Petitioners; C.S.C. and S.D. Shukla for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Krishna Murari, J.—These are two connected petitions between the same parties based on the same set of facts.

2. Writ Petition No. 4036 of 2002 has been filed by the petitioners seeking a mandamus to command the respondents to pay their salary of L. T. Grade from the date of their appointment and to go on making payment of regular salary.

3. The relief is sought mainly on the ground that they were appointed by the committee of management on the respective post after following due procedure prescribed by law and despite the papers having been forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools, and since no decision has been taken within a period of sixty days, their appointment shall be deemed to be approved in view of Regulation 17 (g) of the Regulations framed under the U. P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921.

4. Writ Petition No. 501 of 2003 has been filed by the same petitioners seeking a mandamus to command the respondents to permit them to continue to work on the respective post and not to interfere in their functioning.

Heard Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Sri Gautam, who has entered ap











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