Order XLI Rule 23A CPC | Re-Trial Necessary When Crucial Parties Impleaded In Appeal: Telangana High Court Cannot Freeze Entire Bank Account For Small Disputed Sums: Rajasthan High Court Issues Comprehensive Guidelines Against Indiscriminate Account Freezes In Cyber Crime Probes 187(3) BNSS | No Extension Of Investigation Time Without Notice To Accused: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Default Bail In NDPS Case Road Widening Under Master Plan Cannot Be Stalled For Formal Land Acquisition, Section 305 Permits Direct Removal Of Encroachments: Madhya Pradesh High Court P&H High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Over 45-Day Delay In Informing Detenu Of Right To Represent 'Sole Allegation Of Torture Cannot Stand Alone': Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Husband Under Section 498A IPC After Dowry Demand Disproved Seeking Corroboration To Victim's Testimony Amounts To Adding Insult To Injury: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Offences Of Cheating & Criminal Breach Of Trust Cannot Coexist On Same Facts: Calcutta High Court Quashes FIR Over Commercial Contract Dispute "Accident Alone Is Not Proof": Delhi High Court Acquits Bus Driver In 2003 Road Fatality Case, Rules Mere Speeding Or Collision Insufficient For Section 304A IPC Mandate Of Regulations Must Be Read Into Public Notices: Kerala High Court Reverses Order Directing NMC To Reopen Portal For Medical College's PG Seat Hike Unproven 1946 Oral Sale And Subsequent School Gift Cannot Convey Valid Title Over Tribal Land: Orissa High Court Orders Compensation After 80 Years ED Can Probe Money Laundering In J&K Corruption Cases: J&K High Court Rules S. 5(1)(d) J&K PC Act Corresponds To Amended S. 7 Of Central PC Act Not Mere Lip Service: Supreme Court Quashes GST Notice Under Section 74 Lacking Foundational Facts Of Fraud Or Suppression Selling Manufactured Goods At Factory Premises Doesn't Turn 'Industrial' Land Into 'Commercial' For Stamp Duty: Supreme Court Supreme Court Orders All States To Form Dedicated SITs To Probe Fake Motor Accident Claims, Warns Insurance Top Brass Against Selective Referrals Port Trusts Not Immune From Customs Duty On Pilfered Goods: Supreme Court Upholds Notification Declaring Mumbai Port Trust As Custodian Under Section 45

"Appellant Cannot Be Allowed to Suffer": Supreme Court Invokes Article 142 to Reinstate Lecturer

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


August 28, 2023 — In a landmark decision that underscores the judiciary's role in "doing substantial justice," the Supreme Court of India invoked Article 142 of the Constitution to reinstate a lecturer who had been embroiled in an employment dispute for years. The bench, consisting of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Sanjay Karol, declared, "Even assuming that there was an error committed by the College Management...the appellant cannot be allowed to suffer."

Background

The case centered around the appointment of a lecturer in English. The appellant was initially appointed in the open category, while the fifth respondent was appointed in the Scheduled Caste category. Both had applied for the open category, and the dispute arose over who should have been rightfully appointed based on the order of merit.

 Key Observations

- "The appellant was a regularly appointed candidate and therefore, her appointment on a full-time basis cannot be disturbed," observed the Court, highlighting the appellant's qualifications, including a PhD, which exempted her from the NET requirement.

  - The Court noted that the fifth respondent did not object to the appellant's appointment initially but later contended her seniority based on the first advertisement. "The fifth respondent never made any protest about her appointment against the post reserved for the Scheduled Caste category," the judgment read.

- The Tribunal and High Court had earlier decisions that led to the appellant's role being reduced to a part-time position. The Supreme Court found these decisions to be lacking in consideration for the appellant's career, stating, "In this process, the appellant has become age-barred to get the appointment to the post of lecturer elsewhere."

 The Decision

Invoking its powers under Article 142, the Supreme Court directed the reinstatement of the appellant as a full-time lecturer, effective from January 5, 1995. "For doing substantial justice, this is a fit case where we should invoke our power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India for continuing her appointment on a full-time basis," the Court declared.

The State Government was also directed to release the necessary grant-in-aid for the appellant's salary, ensuring that the fifth respondent's status remains unaffected.

Date of Decision: August 28, 2023

Vijaya Bhiku Kadam vs Mayani Bhag Shikshan Prasarak   Mandal & Ors.     

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/28-Aug-2023_Vijaya_Bhikhu_Vs_Mayani_Bhag_Shikshan_Mandal.pdf"]

Latest Legal News