Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
AJIT KUMAR, SWARUPAMA CHATURVEDI
Singasan Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State Of Up – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. court assesses eligibility of appellants for benefits despite administrative inquiries. (Para 7 , 8 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 19 , 21 , 22 , 28) |
| 3. parties argue regarding clarity in judicial finality. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. judicial finality prevents reopening of established entitlements. (Para 17 , 20 , 23 , 24 , 26 , 27 , 30) |
| 5. conclusion on granting salary and retirement benefits. (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35) |
JUDGMENT :
Swarupama Chaturvedi, J.
1. Heard Sri Om Prakash Ojha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Tej Bhan Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
2. All three appeals being Special Appeal No. 530 of 2025, Special Appeal No. 608 of 2025 and Special Appeal (Defective) No. 656 of 2025, have been preferred against the common judgment and order dated 28.04.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ-A No. 49901 of 2016, Savitri Devi and 2 Others vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others, and the connected Writ-A No. 50483 of 2016, Girija Shankar Pandey vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others, whereby writ petitions filed by appellants here got dismissed.
3. Since common questions of law
Employees cannot be denied salary or retiral benefits for prior approved service due to later administrative inquiries questioning appointment validity.
Post-retirement withdrawal of appointment approval is illegal; retiral benefits are entitled to timely payment with interest on delays.
The court ruled that only approved service counts for seniority, while unapproved appointments do not confer such rights, emphasizing timely challenges to adverse orders.
The doctrine of relation back applies in service matters, allowing for retrospective salary payments to employees whose initial appointments are validated despite previous administrative interruption....
The court ruled that individuals denied appointments due to administrative errors retain entitlement to benefits and seniority on par with their counterparts, affirming parity despite delayed appoint....
Service Matter1 - Under Section 106 of the Schedule “F”, it is nowhere provided that if the appointment of Teacher is made in Non Granted School, then Teacher cannot be given an appointment in the gr....
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
