Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.26 seconds)

State Of Rajasthan vs Managing Committee, Dadhi- Mathi ... on 10 August, 2021

19. Considering the law laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Senior Higher Secondary School, Lachhmangarh and Jagdish Prasad Saini (Supra) and the Rules, 1977 the petitioners are entitled to get leave encashment, as such, Respondent State is directed to grant leave encashment and surrender leave to the petitioners, within 2 months from the date of receipt of copy of the order, as per the maximum permissible accumulation limit of earned leaves to the extent of 120 days to the employees who have attained the permanency.
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur Cites 0 - Cited by 11 - D Mehta - Full Document

Unni Krishnan, J.P. And Ors. Etc. Etc vs State Of Andhra Pradesh And Ors. Etc. Etc on 4 February, 1993

23. While construing the provision under consideration, it is to be borne in mind that interpretation of a welfare legislation should be to promote education. The service conditions of the employees of the aided institutions are sought to be improved and brought on a par with those in government educational institutions to maintain educational standards. It has also to be borne in mind that our Constitution- makers have placed the field of education at a higher pedestal and granted it a special status. Various provisions of the Constitution deal with the aspect of advancement of education. Primary education has been held to be a fundamental right in the decision of this Court in Unni Krishnan, J.P v. State of A.P 1993 1 SCC 645 and this aspect still holds the field despite the decision having been overruled on some other aspects in T.M.A Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka 2002 8 SCC 481. To improve education, various State Governments grant aid to educational institutions and, by and large, teachers of aided private schools deserve to be treated on a par with teachers of government institutions to the extent possible. The provisions of these Acts deserve to be liberally interpreted in favour of the teaching class except where statute may compel otherwise. A statute of no other State has been brought to our notice where similar benefit has been denied to the teachers of the aided institutions to improve education. The service conditions of the teachers also deserve to be improved."
Supreme Court of India Cites 153 - Cited by 957 - L M Sharma - Full Document

The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Ram Khailawan Singh Judgement Given By: ... on 10 October, 2013

8. He would refer to the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of Page 11 of 19 the Hon'ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh in case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs Ram Khilawan Singh decided on 10.10.2013 and would submit that the Hon'ble Division Bench has decided the issue and directed that the employees are entitled to get benefit of encashment of 120 days of earned leaves, therefore, State to extend benefit of encashment of 120 days earned leaves to them.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 22 - Full Document

Ex Sep Pani Ram vs Union Of India And Others on 13 November, 2017

20. Evidently, these rules were framed to enable the absorption of employees and teachers of non-government aided institutions. What is relevant for the purposes of this case is that by Rule 5(viii), carry forward of existing privilege leave is denied; likewise, the period of service in aided institutions is not to be reckoned for the purpose of gratuity under Rule 5(ix). Every employee had to furnish an undertaking in the prescribed form to accept the terms and conditions. Ordinarily no public employer can be faulted in imposing pre-conditions before it recruits an employee. However, such conditions cannot be arbitrary, or so onerous as to be unconscionable. In the opinion of this court, the condition in clause (viii) of Rule 5 i.e., carry forward of balance privilege leave, is barred and requiring employees to seek encashment from their previous employer, i.e., aided institutions, is an arbitrary and unconscionable condition, which cannot be enforced. Speaking that such conditions are enforceable, this court, recently, in Pani Ram vs. Union of India & Ors. after quoting the observations in Central Inland Water Transport Corporation Limited & Anr. V Brojo Nath Ganguly and Anr held as follows:
Uttarakhand High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 16 - V K Bist - Full Document

T.M.A. Pai Foundation & Ors vs State Of Karnataka & Ors (With Other ... on 31 October, 2002

23. While construing the provision under consideration, it is to be borne in mind that interpretation of a welfare legislation should be to promote education. The service conditions of the employees of the aided institutions are sought to be improved and brought on a par with those in government educational institutions to maintain educational standards. It has also to be borne in mind that our Constitution- makers have placed the field of education at a higher pedestal and granted it a special status. Various provisions of the Constitution deal with the aspect of advancement of education. Primary education has been held to be a fundamental right in the decision of this Court in Unni Krishnan, J.P v. State of A.P 1993 1 SCC 645 and this aspect still holds the field despite the decision having been overruled on some other aspects in T.M.A Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka 2002 8 SCC 481. To improve education, various State Governments grant aid to educational institutions and, by and large, teachers of aided private schools deserve to be treated on a par with teachers of government institutions to the extent possible. The provisions of these Acts deserve to be liberally interpreted in favour of the teaching class except where statute may compel otherwise. A statute of no other State has been brought to our notice where similar benefit has been denied to the teachers of the aided institutions to improve education. The service conditions of the teachers also deserve to be improved."
Supreme Court of India Cites 34 - Cited by 608 - V N Khare - Full Document
1