SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(MP) 175

VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
Jagdish Chandra Chawda – Appellant
Versus
School Education Department – Respondent


Advocates:
L.C. Patne for petitioners; Anand Bhatt, Government Advocate for respondents/State.

ORDER

1. Regard being held to the similitude of the nature of the petition and reliefs both the petitions are being disposed of by the common order.

2. The petitioner is seeking direction to the respondents to grant the benefits of two advance increments w.e.f June 1999 and refix the pay of the petitioner and post retiral benefits alongwith the arrears with interest on account of obtaining D.Ed diploma during the course of employment after seeking due permission from the department.

3. For the sake of convenience, the facts are noted from W.P No.19697/2022 (Jagdish Chandra Chawda v. the State of M.P and Ors.)

4. The facts of the case are that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Deputy Teacher by an order dated 31.12.1986 on the consolidated monthly salary of Rs. 300/- per month and after completion of 2 years of service he was appointed and posted as Assistant Teacher in the then regular pay scale of Rs. 975-1650/- + admissible dearness allowance w.e.f. 9.1.1987, by an order dated 2.3.1988. The petitioner sought permission from the department for pursuing D.Ed. Diploma course which was accorded to him by order dated 3.12.1997, vide Sr. No. 27, and accordingly, the pet

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top