Presumption Of Correctness Of Judicial Records Not Absolute And Can Be Rebutted By Direct Evidence: Kerala High Court on Married Daughter Cannot Challenge Partition After 21-Year Slumber If She Had Knowledge: Madhya Pradesh High Court Kerala High Court Orders Immediate Suspension Of Lakshadweep CJM For Allegedly Forging Witness Deposition To Convict Accused Supreme Court Bars Post-Divorce Maintenance Claims When Wife Voluntarily Waived Maintenance In Settlement Agreement Advocate Is An Officer Of Court, Not Mere Agent Of Client: Allahabad High Court Distinguishes Between Active Concealment & Statement In Ignorance, Slaps Cost On Litigants For Misleading Bench Cannot Summon Accused Mechanically On Protest Petition Without Assigning Justifiable Reasons: Andhra Pradesh High Court Increment Not A Bounty: Allahabad High Court Rules Public Holiday Cannot Delay Pay Hike For Teachers Joining Next Working Day Paying Taxes Or Utility Connections Confer No Legal Ownership Over Govt Land': Andhra Pradesh High Court Orders Demolition Of Encroachment 'Cannot Compel Public Authority To Collect Data From Private Bodies': Bombay High Court Quashes CIC Orders Directing SEBI To Procure BSE Records Under RTI Act Section 10 CPC Cannot Stay Previously Instituted Title Suit Pending Subsequent Probate Case; Inherent Powers Under Section 151 Inapplicable When Probate Dismissed: Calcutta High Court Mere Phone Calls Without Transcripts No Ground For Murder Conspiracy: Delhi High Court Clear Violation Of Section 42 NDPS Act': Gujarat High Court Holds Failure To Record Secret Info In Writing Fatal When Police Officer Had Time To Act JK High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Cop Accused Of Threatening Advocate Over Phone Call Without Prior Sanction Under Section 197 CrPC Custody Unwarranted For Mere Formalities Once Weapon Is Recovered: Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail In BNS Axe Attack Case Circumstances Of Crime Can Be Assessed During Trial: High Court Upholds Trial Of Minor As Adult Under JJ Act In Murder Case Statutory Deposit Under Order 21 Rule 89 CPC Is A Sine Qua Non; Litigant Cannot Stall Auction Sale By Merely Blaming Counsel: Madras High Court Ban Junk Food Within 50 Metres Of Schools: Rajasthan High Court Takes Suo Moto Cognizance To Enforce FSSAI Norms, Protect Children From Obesity

Supreme Court Holds Government Order Restricting Advance Increments for Lecturers Not Applicable Retrospectively

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


On May 16 , 2023 , In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court of India ruled on the interpretation and retrospective applicability of government orders regarding advance increments for lecturers based on their qualifications. The Court held that a subsequent government order, which sought to limit the eligibility of certain lecturers for advance increments, cannot be applied retrospectively.

Supreme Court has clarified the applicability of government orders concerning advance increments for lecturers based on their qualifications. The Court ruled that a government order issued on March 29, 2001, which sought to modify the eligibility criteria for advance increments, cannot be applied retrospectively.

The case involved a dispute regarding the interpretation of government orders issued on December 21, 1999, and March 29, 2001. The orders provided for different levels of advance increments based on the qualifications of lecturers at the time of recruitment and subsequent promotions. The question before the Court was whether the subsequent government order could be applied retrospectively to lecturers who were already placed in the selection grade before its issuance.

After considering the arguments presented by both sides, the Court identified two main points for consideration. Firstly, it examined whether the subsequent government order was a clarification or a substantive amendment of the previous order. Secondly, it analyzed whether the subsequent order could be applied retrospectively to lecturers who had already received advance increments based on their qualifications.

The Court held that the subsequent government order, issued on March 29, 2001, was not merely a clarification but a substantive amendment. It restricted the eligibility of lecturers who had already received advance increments for holding a Ph.D. degree at the time of recruitment from receiving additional increments upon placement in the selection grade. The Court emphasized that such an amendment, which withdraws a benefit not anticipated under the previous scheme, cannot be given retrospective effect.

Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the judgments of the High Court of Kerala. The Court held that lecturers who were placed in the selection grade before March 29, 2001, are entitled to all the incentives stipulated in the government order dated December 21, 1999. The judgment provides clarity on the interpretation and retrospective applicability of government orders concerning advance increments for lecturers.

Date of Judgment: 16th May, 2023

SREE SANKARACHARYA UNIVERSITY  OF SANSKRIT & ORS.   vs  MANU & ANR.     

 

Latest Legal News