Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.21 seconds)
K.Somu vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 18 November, 2022 cites

Court In The Case Of Secretary, State Of ... vs . Uma on 9 April, 2015

15. As far as the retrospective regularisation is concerned, it is made clear that the petitioners were appointed in the sanctioned post in the time scale of pay and they were appointed as Village Librarian on consolidated pay salary, which is an unclassified post and more so, a part- time job. Thus, the retrospective regularisation in the post of Village Librarian cannot be granted and the petitioners had been extended the benefit of regular appointment in the sanctioned post of Grade-III Librarian. The said absorption itself is a concession extended to the writ petitioners, considering the long services rendered by them in the post of Village Librarian and therefore, the claim of the writ petitioners for retrospective regularisation deserves no merit consideration and the benefit of regularisation and permanent absorption already granted with effect from the date of appointment of the writ petitioners as Grade-III Librarian is in consonance with the principles laid down by the Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of The Secretary, State of Karnataka and others v. Uma Devi & others reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1. Thus, there is no perversity or otherwise in the matter of grant of regularisation to the writ petitioners in the post of Grade-III Village Librarian.
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur Cites 1 - Cited by 2142 - Full Document
1