Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Allahabad High Court

Sunil Dutt Rai And Others vs State Of U.P. And Others on 16 June, 2010

Author: Rakesh Sharma

Bench: Rakesh Sharma

Court No. ­ 10



Case :­ WRIT ­ A No. ­ 35367 of 2010



Petitioner :­ Sunil Dutt Rai And Others

Respondent :­ State Of U.P. And Others

Petitioner Counsel :­ Somesh Khare,Komal Khare

Respondent Counsel :­ C.S.C.



Hon'ble Rakesh Sharma,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel who has accepted notice on behalf of Opp. Party Nos. 1 to 3. Issue notice to Opp. Party No. 4. 

The   Opp.   Parties   may   file   counter   affidavit   within   six   weeks.  Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed with in two weeks thereafter.  List this case in the first week of September, 2010. As per learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners have been  appointed in the services of the educational institution, indicated in  the writ petition, after following due procedure for direct recruitment.  Petitioners'   appointment   was   made   considering   the   compelling  administrative exigencies, number of students in the institution and  the interest of imparting proper education to the students in the rural  areas.

Learned counsel for the petitioners have further submitted that the  petitioners   have   been   discharging   duties,   functions   and  responsibilities   of   the   post   held   by   them   and   as   such,   they   are  entitled for monthly salary. They rather submit that no one has been  appointed   against   the   said   post   held   by   the   petitioners   by   the  concerned authority and the continuance of the petitioners' service is  required in the institution. 

On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel has strongly resisted  the motion on the ground that the petitioners were not finally and  regularly appointed and there is absence of sanction of the authority  concerned as required under law. 

In view of the above, it is provided that if the employer­employee  relationship subsists and the petitioners are continuing in the service,  they shall be paid their current salary w.e.f. June, 2010 and shall be  allowed to continue. The arrangement shall continue till the person  duly appointed by the selection board joins the institution.  Order Date :­ 16.6.2010 n.u.