Back
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
PARTHA SARATHI CHATTERJEE, J
NANDY – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. arguments regarding justification for salary classification. (Para 14 , 15) |
| 2. previous rulings establish the binding nature of judicial decisions against arbitrary state classifications. (Para 16 , 20 , 21) |
| 3. classifications denying benefits based on arbitrary criteria are unjust and impermissible. (Para 18) |
| 4. court's findings on the legality of repayments and classifications. (Para 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 5. the court directed refunds and corrections in pension calculations based on unjust practices. (Para 25 , 27) |
1. Affidavit-in-opposition filed on behalf of the State is taken on record.
2. Mr. Ali, learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner does not want to use any reply to the said opposition.
3. The instant writ petition is yet another example of the inconsistent stance taken by the State regarding the grant of additional benefits to the Headmasters of upgraded schools.
4. Initially, the Education Department decided to extend such benefits to the Headmasters of all upgraded schools but subsequently revised its position, restricting the benefits to Headmasters of schools upgraded after a specific cut-off date. This change in stance led to disputes conc
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
