Employees Cannot Pick Favourable Terms and Reject the Rest: Bombay High Court Upholds SIDBI’s Cut-Off Date for Pension to CPF Optees Rules of the Game Were Never Changed: Delhi High Court Upholds CSIR’s Power to Prescribe Minimum Threshold in CASE-2023 Resignation Does Not Forfeit Earned Pension: Calcutta High Court Declares Company Superannuation Benefit as ‘Wages’ Under Law Fraud Vitiates Everything—Stranger Can File Independent Suit Against Compromise Decree: Bombay High Court Refuses to Reject 49-Year-Old Challenge at Threshold Mere Long Possession By One Co-Owner Does Not Destroy The Co-Ownership Right Of The Other: Madras High Court State Cannot Hide Behind An Illegal Undertaking: Punjab & Haryana High Court Questions Denial Of Retrospective Regularization Article 21-A Cannot Be Held Hostage to Transfer Preferences: Allahabad High Court Upholds Teacher Redeployment to Enforce Pupil–Teacher Ratio Arbitrator Cannot Rewrite Contract Or Travel Beyond Pleadings: Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes ₹5.18 Crore Award Director’ in GeM Clause 29 Does Not Mean ‘Independent Director’: Gujarat High Court Sets Aside Technical Disqualification Section 25(3) Is Sacrosanct – Removal of a Trademark Cannot Rest on a Defective Notice: Delhi High Court Not Every Broken Promise Is Rape: Delhi High Court Draws Clear Line Between ‘Suspicion’ and ‘Grave Suspicion’ in False Promise to Marry Case Section 37 Is Not A Second Appeal On Merits: Delhi High Court Refuses To Re-Appreciate Evidence In Challenge To Arbitral Award Recovery After Retirement Is Clearly Impermissible: Bombay High Court Shields Retired Teacher From ₹2.80 Lakh Salary Recovery Paying Tax Does Not Legalise Illegality: Bombay High Court Refuses to Shield Alleged Unauthorized Structure Beneficial Pension Scheme Cannot Be Defeated By Cut-Off Dates: Andhra Pradesh High Court Directs EPFO To Follow Sunil Kumar B. Guidelines On Higher Pension Claims Equity Aids the Vigilant, Not Those Who Sleep Over Their Rights: Punjab & Haryana High Court Refuses to Revive 36-Year-Old Pay Parity Claim Students Cannot Be Penalised For Legislative Invalidity: Supreme Court Protects Degrees Granted Before 2005 Yash Pal Verdict Restructuring Without Fulfilment of Conditions Cannot Defeat Insolvency: Supreme Court Reaffirms Default as the Sole Trigger Under Section 7 IBC Section 100-A CPC Slams The Door On Intra-Court Appeals In RERA Matters”: Allahabad High Court Declares Special Appeal Not Maintainable Mental Distance Between ‘May Be’ and ‘Must Be’ Is Long: Patna High Court Acquits Six in Murder Case Built on Broken Chain of Circumstances Where Corruption Takes Roots, Rule of Law Is Replaced by Rule of Transaction: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail to DIG Harcharan Singh Bhullar Mere Voter List and Corrected SSC Certificate Cannot Prove Paternity: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects 21-Year-Old Bid for DNA Test in Partition Appeal Section 147 NI Act Makes Offence Compoundable At Any Stage: Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Concurrent Convictions in Cheque Bounce Case After Settlement Bald Allegations of Adultery Based on Suspicion Cannot Dissolve a Marriage: Jharkhand High Court Once a Document Is Admitted in Evidence, Its Stamp Defect Cannot Be Reopened: Madras High Court

Supreme Court Upholds Counting of Service Rendered by Transferred Teachers for Seniority in Pune Municipal Corporation

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India upheld the inclusion of service rendered by primary teachers in the Zilla Parishad (ZP) for determining their seniority after their transfer to the Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC). The judgment, delivered by Justice Surya Kant and Justice J.K. Maheshwari, emphasized the importance of interpreting the relevant statutory provisions and established that the service rendered by the transferred teachers in the ZP should be considered as service rendered in the PMC itself.

The Court stated, "Service rendered by such officers and servants before the appointed day shall be deemed to be service rendered in the service of the Corporation," highlighting the protection provided under Clause 5(c) of Appendix IV of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act, 1949. Consequently, the seniority of the primary teachers is to be counted from the initial date of their appointment in the ZP.

The ruling dismissed the argument that Section 3(3)(b) of the MMC Act, which deals with the protection of conditions of service, was applicable to the determination of seniority. The Court clarified that Section 3(3)(b) does not regulate the conditions of service of transferred employees and should not be invoked in this context. Instead, the Court relied on Clause 5(c) of Appendix IV, which explicitly safeguards the rights of officers and servants transferred to the Corporation, deeming their prior service as service rendered in the PMC.

Furthermore, the Court rejected the plea of estoppel and acquiescence, stating that the transferred teachers were not obliged to challenge the recommendations of the PMC Committee. The Court emphasized that the cause of action arose upon the issuance of the final seniority list, which prompted the timely approach to the High Court. As a result, the objection of estoppel and acquiescence raised by the appellant was untenable.

Date of Decision: March 17, 2023

Maharashtra Rajya Padvidhar Prathamik Shikshak Va Kendra Pramukh Sabha   vs Pune Municipal Corporation and Ors. 

 

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/17-Mar-2023-Maharastra-vs-PMC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News