Back
SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY
Pramod Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.
1. This is second round of litigation. Petitioners have approached this Court earlier by way of filing Writ-A No. 18428 of 2018, which was disposed of vide order dated 29.08.2018 and for reference the same is reproduced hereinafter:
After the Institution has been brought within grant-in-aid, the Joint Director of Education (Female) vide letter dated 16.02.2018 has directed the Regional Assistant Director of Education (Basic), Varanasi to pass appropriate orders for payment of salary to the petitioners and other teachers.
Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submit that the direction was issued on 16.02.2018, but till date the Regional Assistant Director of Education (Basic), Varanasi has not passed the final order in pursuance of the directions dated 16.02.2018 issued by the Joint Director of Education (Female).
With the consent of the parties, this petition is finally disposed of with a direction t
The court upheld the necessity of verifying the genuineness of appointments in grant-in-aid institutions, emphasizing that forged documents cannot establish entitlement to salary from public funds.
The court upheld the rejection of salary claims based on findings that the petitioners' appointment letters were forged and the selection process did not comply with applicable recruitment rules.
Point of law: If the District Basic Education Officer does not communicate his decision within one month from the date of receipt of the papers under clause (4), he shall be deemed to have accorded a....
Deemed approval for teacher appointments under Rule 10(5) of U.P. recruitment rules entitles the petitioner to salary from the date of its occurrence, especially after the institution is recognized u....
The court affirmed that appointments made prior to new qualification rules remain valid, emphasizing continuity of service and entitlement to salary for teachers who later acquired necessary qualific....
Appointments made under inapplicable statutory rules are void and cannot confer enforceable rights; the governing statutes change with institutional upgrades.
Valid appointments made under existing rules cannot be retroactively invalidated by later amendments or determinations of sanctioned strength.
The qualifications for appointment must be judged by the rules in force at the time of selection, not by subsequent amendments.
The right to salary is contingent upon a valid appointment made in accordance with statutory provisions.
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
