Back
SIDDHARTH
Rachna Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Shri Avneesh Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent no.1 and Shri Vikram Bahadur Singh, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2, 3 and 5.
2. This petition has been filed praying for quashing of the order dated 20.2.2020 passed by respondent no.2, Secretary U.P. Basic Education Board, Allahabad to the extent it denied the arrears of salary to the petitioner and other benefits from 10.3.2008 to 29.10.2010.Further prayer has been made for direction to the respondent no.3, Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Fatehpur to make the payment of arrears of salary of the petitioner and consequential benefits for the aforesaid period. Finally direction for compliance of the order dated 16.3.2009 passed by the respondent no.2, has been sought regarding direction of payment of salary and other consequential benefits to the petitioner from 29.10.2020 to 9.5.2011.
3. The brief facts of the petition are that the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher in aided primary School on 4.1.2006. She joined in Prathmik Vidhyalaya Naraicha, Vikas Kshetra Khaujha, District Fatehpur. On 15.9.2007 she was transferred to Prathmik Vidhyalaya, Nandapur
Employees forced out of employment due to illegal actions of the employer are entitled to payment for the period of forced unemployment.
The principle of 'no work no pay' is inapplicable when an employee is willing to work but is prevented from doing so by the employer's actions or failure to comply with reinstatement orders, entitlin....
The appointment under Dying-in-Harness Rules was substantive and could not be terminated without due process. Mere implication in false and illegal proceedings not resulting in any punishment cannot ....
An employee prevented from working without fault retains entitlement to salary; principles of 'No Work No Pay' do not apply.
The principle of 'no work, no pay' cannot be invoked when an employee is unlawfully prevented from discharging their duties, affirming the entitlement to pay during such periods.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of an employee to salary and retiral benefits based on the regularization of their entire service period, supported by documented e....
Continuous service obligates salary payment despite appointment legality, and equal treatment demands non-discriminatory enforcement of employment rights.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of prior approval for the termination of a Group 'D' employee, as mandated by Rule 21 of the Uttar Pradesh Recognized Basic Scho....
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
