Back
MANOJ MISRA, VIKAS BUDHWAR
State of U. P. – Appellant
Versus
Satya Bhama Dubey – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Mohan Srivastava, the learned Standing Counsel for the appellants and Sri Siddharth Khare for the petitioner-respondent.
2. This intra-court appeal is against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 12.11.2014 in Writ-A No.41068 of 1996 whereby the order dated 26.11.1996 passed by the Regional Deputy Director of Education (Secondary), Agra determining the inter se seniority of the writ petitioner, Smt. Satya Bhama Dubey (the first respondent) and Smt. Sushila Sharma (the second respondent -respondent no.5 in the writ petition) has been quashed, holding the writ petitioner Smt. Satya Bhama Dubey senior to Smt. Sushila Sharma.
3. In addition to above, the learned Single Judge upon finding that due to wrong determination of the seniority, the writ petitioner was deprived of her appointment as an ad hoc Principal of the Institution proceeded to award compensation of Rs.2 lacs to be paid by the State Government. Further, the learned Single Judge directed that the salary of the petitioner shall be fixed treating her as officiating Principal of the Institution with effect from 01.07.1996 notionally and based thereon, the post-retiral benefits like pen
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the seniority of a teacher appointed on a substantive basis is to be determined with reference to the date of approval, not the date of joinin....
The main legal point established is that seniority is determined based on substantive appointment and age, as specified in the regulations of the Intermediate Education Act, 1921, overriding the time....
The court upheld the Single Judge's decision, emphasizing the importance of seniority and misconduct in determining appointment validity under established legal principles.
The court established that interim orders do not invalidate prior valid selections and that seniority must be determined based on actual service and selection dates.
The date of entry into service should determine seniority, and any departure from this principle must be consistent with the requirements of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
Seniority among teachers must be determined based on the date of entry into service rather than date of birth, upholding Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
Seniority among teachers is determined by the date of acquiring training qualifications, not merely by the date of appointment.
Seniority among teachers is determined by the date of substantive appointment and possession of requisite qualifications at that time, with untrained teachers not equating their service with trained ....
In school service under the relevant education rules, seniority in the teacher cadre is determined by the date of initial appointment to the junior teacher position, as this is not a promotional post....
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
