Back
ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL
Vinod Kumar Srivastava – Appellant
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Rohit Ranjan Agarwal, J.)
1. This bunch of writ petitions raises somewhat similar question for consideration by this Court filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The leading case being Writ-A No.21492 of 2023 (Vinod Kumar Srivastava vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors.), wherein orders dated 21.11.2023 and 22.11.2023 passed by District Inspector of Schools, Jalaun at Orai is under challenge stopping salary of the petitioner in terms of Government Order dated 09.11.2023.
2. Petitioners before this Court have raised serious question as to the competence of the Regional Regularization Committee constituted by the State Government for looking into regularization of the Assistant Teachers appointed against the short term vacancy/ad hoc appointment in view of the provisions of Section 33-B, C, F, and G.
3. The claim for regularization in most of cases has been rejected by the Committee relying upon the decision rendered by the Apex Court in case of Sanjay Singh and others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, Civil Appeal No. 8300 of 2016, decided on 26.08.2020 and Government Order dated 09.11.2023.
4. The State Government had promulgated Uttar Pradesh Secondary
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....
High Courts, in exercising power under Article 226 of Constitution will not issue directions for regularization, absorption or permanent continuance, unless employees claiming regularisation had been....
The court established that a teacher's continuous absence for five years leads to deemed abandonment of service, allowing for regularisation under specific provisions of the Act.
Prolonged service of over ten years without legal hindrance can qualify employees for regularization, regardless of the initial nature of their appointments.
Regularization of services for employees who have served for over ten years is a right that must be considered by the state, provided there are no valid objections, and the state must adhere to its o....
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 employees cannot claim regularization unless they are working against sanctioned posts, as per the Jharkhand Regularization Rules of 2015 and 2019.
The court established that daily-wage employees engaged before the cut-off date are entitled to regularization under the Rules of 2016, regardless of initial appointment irregularities.
Discriminatory treatment in employment regularization cases violates the principle of equality as per Article 14 of the Constitution.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioner's long service as a Trained Graduate Teacher against a substantive vacant post and the Government's decision to declare the non....
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
