Back
PRAKASH SINGH
Tirthraj – Appellant
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh Thru. Secy. Secondary Education Lko. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Shree Prakash Singh, J.) :
1. Heard learned counsels for the petitioners and Sri Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned Chief Standing Counsel and Sri Vivek Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State.
2. Notices to the concerned respondents other than the State are hereby dispensed with.
3. Core legal issues are common in all bunch of the writ petitions, hence, the members of Bar were invited to address and all these writ petitions are decided by common Judgment and order.
4. Chronic cases are brought before this Court by way of the bunch of the writ petitions wherein the petitioners have assailed their respective orders of rejection of regularisation, which were passed by the Committee headed by the Joint Director of Education of respective regions.
5. The crux of the issue is that the petitioners were appointed either under the Second Removal of Difficulties Order framed under the Act No.5 of 1982 or under unamended Section 18 of Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education (Service Selection Boards) Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act 1982'. Subsequently, vide the UP Act No.7 of 2016, a new Section 33-G is inserted with effect from 22.3.2016, thus, it was
The court established that the failure to consider relevant records and provide a fair hearing constitutes a violation of the principles of natural justice, rendering the decisions of administrative ....
The court established that adherence to prescribed procedures and principles of natural justice is essential in administrative decision-making, particularly in matters affecting the rights of individ....
The court ruled that the termination of ad hoc teachers' services based on the Government Order was unjust and mandated fresh consideration of their regularization claims under the relevant statutory....
A teacher cannot be dismissed for irregularity in appointment if they are not involved in any misrepresentation or conspiracy, and teachers are entitled to be paid salary until their claim is finally....
The court established that regularization claims under the Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education (Services Selection Board) Act, 1982, must be considered based on the specific provisions applicable to th....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that nobody can be condemned unheard, and an authority cannot review a decision taken by a duly constituted committee without referring the matter ....
Appointments made in violation of statutory provisions are void ab initio, reinforcing the requirement for lawful selection processes in public employment to uphold Articles 14 and 16 rights.
The principle of res judicata bars the respondents from raising any objection with regard to the legality of the appointments of the petitioners.
The court affirmed deemed approval for teacher appointments due to the respondent's failure to act within legal timelines and ruled that objections for rejection were legally invalid.
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
