NARAYAN SHUKLA, SHEO KUMAR SINGH I
VINOD KUMAR SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent
Hon’ble Sheo Kumar Singh-I, J.—Heard Mr. Satish Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as learned counsel for the respondents.
2. By means of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuing a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay the salary of the petitioner like other similarly situated honorarium lecturers teaching in other colleges of different Universities for whole year and further to pay the arrears of the salary of the petitioner for back years with interest.
3. The brief facts giving rise to filing of the present writ petition are that initially the petitioner was temporarily engaged on contractual basis as ad hoc lecturer in Philosophy Department of Y.D.P.G. College, Lakhimpur Kheri against leave vacancy which was fallen vacant due to leave of one Dr. Yogendra Singh (Lecturer Philosophy). The petitioner was temporarily engaged by the Committee of Management as honorarium lecturer which was year to year basis and later on amendment was brought in U.P. Higher Education Service Selection Commission and Section 31-E was inserted on 23.12.2006
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.