Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness 304 Part I IPC | Sudden Fight Between Brothers Over Mud House Construction: Jharkhand High Court Converts Murder Conviction To Culpable Homicide When Rape Fails, Section 450 Cannot Stand: Orissa High Court Acquits Accused of House-Trespass After Finding Relationship Consensual Concurrent Eviction Orders Will Not Be Reopened Under Article 227: Madras High Court Section 128 Contract Act | Surety’s Liability Is Co-Extensive: Kerala High Court Upholds Recovery from Guarantors’ Salary Custodial Interrogation Not Warranted When Offences Are Not Punishable With Death or Life: Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Deputy Tahsildar in Land Records Case Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Consumer | No Complete Deficiency In Service — Excess Rainfall Also To Blame: Supreme Court Halves Compensation In Groundnut Seed Crop Failure Case Development Cannot Override The Master Plan: Supreme Court Nullifies Cement Unit CLU In Agricultural Zone Negative Viscera Report Is Not a Passport to Acquittal: Madras High Court Confirms Life Term of Parents for Poisoning Mentally Retarded Daughter Observations Have Had a Demoralising and Chilling Effect: Allahabad High Court Judge Recuses from Bail Matter After Supreme Court’s Strong Remarks Controversial YouTube Remarks On ‘Black Magic Village’ Not A Crime: Gauhati High Court Quashes FIR Against Abhishek Kar “Failure To Specifically Deny Allegations Amounts To Admission”: J&K High Court Reiterates Law Under Order VIII CPC Section 293 Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Examination of Expert When DNA Report Is Disputed: MP High Court Medical Evidence Trumps False Alibi: Allahabad HC Upholds Conviction In Matrimonial Murder Where Strangulation Was Masked By Post-Mortem Burning Helping Young Advocates Is Not A Favour – It Is A Need For A Better Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Section 82 Cr.P.C. | Mere Non-Appearance Does Not Ipsi Facto Establish Absconding: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Order Declaring Student Abroad as Proclaimed Person

Supreme Court Grants Pay Protection To Lecturer Claim Against Academic Institution

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court of India has resolved a pay protection dispute between a lecturer and an academic institution. The appellant, Asma Shaw, had been appointed as a Lecturer in English at The Islamia College of Science & Commerce, Srinagar Kashmir. The dispute arose over whether her appointment entitled her to pay protection. The case had been previously heard by a Single Judge of the Jammu & Kashmir High Court, who ruled in favor of the appellant. However, a Division Bench of the High Court overturned the decision, leading to the appeal being filed in the Supreme Court.

In the judgement authored by Justice Abhay S. Oka, the Supreme Court carefully examined the applicability of Article 77-D of the Jammu & Kashmir Civil Service Regulations and the nature of the appellant's appointment. The court emphasized the distinction between a tenure post and an appointment on a regular post with a tenure basis. The court also scrutinized the language used in the advertisement and terms of the appellant's appointment, finding indications that her post was substantive rather than ad-hoc.

Justice Oka, writing for the bench, stated, "The entire approach of the Division Bench was erroneous when it came to the conclusion that the appellant was not appointed on a substantive basis and, therefore, she does not satisfy the criteria laid down by Article 77-D." The judgement highlighted the exception carved out by the third proviso to Article 77-D and emphasized that the appellant's case did not fall within the scope of this exception.

Supreme Court set aside the Division Bench's decision and restored the Single Judge's judgment, directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to grant pay protection to the appellant within one month. Additionally, the court ordered the payment of arrears to the appellant within three months.

This ruling has significant implications for similar cases involving pay protection disputes and provides clarity on the interpretation of regulations related to such matters. The decision reaffirms the importance of careful consideration of the terms of appointment and relevant provisions when determining pay protection entitlements for government servants.

Date of Decision: August 08, 2023.

Asma Shaw vs The Islamia College of Science & Commerce Srinagar Kashmir & Ors.                                                  

Latest Legal News