Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.56 seconds)
Documents citing Vidya Vikas Samiti, Paratwada And Anr. vs Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, ... on 4 August, 1997

Shaikh Abdul Munaf Shaikh Ameer vs The Commissioner Jalgaon City ... on 2 May, 2019

5. Per contra, as per affidavit of the respondents, Shri. P. K. Lakhotiya, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the State argued that, the petitioner had not served for 12 years on the basic pay of Lecturer in College of Education and therefore he was not entitled for senior scale of Lecturer in College of Education. He may be entitled for pay protection but not for promotion. He placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in case of Vidya Vikas Samiti, Paratwada Vs. Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Amravati Division reported in 1998(2) Bom. C. R. 769.
Bombay High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - A M Dhavale - Full Document

Premchand Nathu Patil vs The State Of Maharashtra And Others on 2 May, 2019

5. Per contra, as per affidavit of the respondents, Shri. P. K. Lakhotiya, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the State argued that, the petitioner had not served for 12 years on the basic pay of Lecturer in College of Education and therefore he was not entitled for senior scale of Lecturer in College of Education. He may be entitled for pay protection but not for promotion. He placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in case of Vidya Vikas Samiti, Paratwada Vs. Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Amravati Division reported in 1998(2) Bom. C. R. 769.
Bombay High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - A M Dhavale - Full Document

New Education Institute And Ors. vs Mahejabin Ashfak Ahmed Shaikh And Ors. on 24 August, 2007

7. The learned Counsel places reliance in the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 1524 of 1996, Chandrakant s/o Samhhaji Shende v. The Deputy Director of Education, Nagpur and Ors. of the Nagpur Bench of this Court and Vidya Vikas Samiti, Paratwada and Anr. v. Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Amravati Division, Amravati and Anr., decided on 4-8-1997 [since reported in 1998(1) Mh.LJ. 462] where both the Division Benches have held that in view of Rule 41 a teacher who is teaching in secondary school does not get promoted only because he is posted to the junior college attached to the school. The post of the junior college lecturer is not a promotional post for an assistant teacher of a secondary school to which is attached the junior college. In these circumstances, the learned Counsel submits that there is no perversity in the order of the Tribunal which requires interference from this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
Bombay High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 4 - N Mhatre - Full Document
1