Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.28 seconds)
Ashaskiya Anudan Prapt Adim Jati ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 25 March, 2022 cites

State Of M.P. vs Sharique A. Ali . on 7 January, 2014

11. When claim of the petitioner is examined in the light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of the State of Madhya Pradesh & Another versus Sharique A Ali & Others (supra) then it is evident that the writ of mandamus is sought seeking grant of necessary sanction for creation of 36 posts in Higher Secondary School No.2 Daboh run by the respondent No.5/Anusuchit Jati Shiksha Samiti vide Annexure P/26, which reveals that the persons qua whom the relief is sought are all appointees after coming into effect of the Amended Act. Thus, in terms of Paragraph No.7 of the order dated 7.1.2014 passed by the Supreme Court, it is evident that the Amended Act is applicable to all those teachers/lecturers/non-teaching staff, who are appointed by the private aided educational institutions in the State of Madhya Pradesh after promulgation of the Amended Act.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 1 - Cited by 126 - Full Document

Smt. Renuka And Others vs State Of Karnataka And Others on 13 August, 1998

13. The High Court of Karnataka in the case of Smt.Renuka & Others versus State of Karnataka & Others 1999 (2) Kar.L.J 318 dealt with the similar situation & held that the grant-in-aid cannot be claimed as a matter of right. Giving of such grants are necessarily a part of the Government Policy, which again depends on the financial capacity & revenue resources of the Government.
Karnataka High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Union Of India (Uoi) vs Hindustan Development Corpn. Ltd. on 19 January, 1998

15. The Supreme Court in the case of Union of India (UOI) & Others versus Hindustan Development Corporation & Others Manu/SC/0219/1994 Paragraph 29 has observed that the expectation cannot be the same as anticipation. It is different from a wish, a desire or a hope nor does it amount to a claim or demand on the ground of a right. However, earnest and sincere a wish, a desire or a hope may be and however confidently one may look to them to be fulfilled, they by themselves cannot amount to an assert-able expectation and a mere disappointment does not attract legal consequences. A pious hope even leading to a moral 12 obligation cannot amount to a legitimate expectation. Therefore, legitimacy of an expectation can only be inferred if it is based on the sanction of law or custom or an established procedure followed in regular and natural system.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 12 - Full Document

Smt. Neena Pramanik vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 30 August, 2017

12. A Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.354/2017 (Shishu Vidyapeeth Bengali Girls Higher Secondary School, Gun Carriage Factory Estate, Jabalpur versus Smt.Anusua Das Sharma & Others) vide order dated 30.8.2017 has held that the Repealed Service Rules, 1988 would not apply for promotion to the staff of the private aided 10 educational institutions, after enforcement of the Madhya Pradesh Ashaskiya Shikshan Sanstha (Adhyapakon Tatha Anya Karmachariyon Ke Vetano Ka Sandaya) Sanshodhan Adhiniyam, 2000 and the Madhya Pradesh Ashashkiya Shikshan Sanstha Anudan Niyam, 2008.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 3 - Full Document
1