Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.19 seconds)2Ec.To Govt.,School Education ... vs Thiru R.Govindaswamy & Ors on 21 February, 2014
13. Regarding the part-time employment, the Hon'ble Supreme
Court of India in the case of Secretary to Government School Education
Department, Chennai vs. R.Govindaswamy and others reported in
(2014) [4] SCC 769, held as follows:
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.
Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 16 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
1