IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.DHANDAPANI, J
P.Cathrine Julie – Appellant
Versus
The Union Of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. employment appointment facts and salary not released (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. court considerations and directions for approval (Para 2 , 5) |
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the second respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner as Trained Graduate Teacher since the petitioner is appointed against an already sanctioned post coming under the Grant in Aid Scheme and to pay the salary of the petitioner with effect from 13.6.2014 onwards with arrears.
2. Heard the learned counsels appearing on either side. With the consent of both sides, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing at the admission stage itself. Since no adverse order is passed as against the third respondent, notice to the third respondent is dispensed with.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that she joined the service of the third respondent’s school on 12.05.20214 which is a sanctioned post that arose vacant due to the resignation of one Ms.Antony Grace Mary and was issued with an appointment order on 13.06.2014. The school has sent proposal to the Education Department intimating her appointment on 13.06.2014 and to release her salary and thereafter several reminders in
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.