SUDAMA SINGH versus NATH SARAN SINGH & ORS.

SUDAMA SINGH versus NATH SARAN SINGH & ORS.

Both the appellant and first respondent must be deemed substantively appointed from April 21, 1977 under s.16GG. Where substantive appointment is on the same date, seniority is determined by age, and the appellant, being older, is senior.

Parties
Appellant: Sudama Singh; First Respondent: Nath Saran Singh; Non Party Participant: District Inspector of Schools, Ballia; Non Party Participant: Committee of Management, Gandhi Inter College, Chilkahar, Ballia
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
13 November 1987
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment and Order Dated 18.2.1986 of the Allahabad High Court in Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 9895 of 1985
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court judgment set aside; appellant declared senior to first respondent.
Legal Topics
Seniority Determination, Regularization of Ad Hoc Teachers, Interpretation of Uttar Pradesh Intermediate Education Act, 1921, Regulation of School Appointments
Education Law Administrative Law Seniority Determination Regularization of Ad Hoc Teachers Interpretation of Uttar Pradesh Intermediate Education Act, 1921 Regulation of School Appointments

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sudama Singh

Appellant

Nath Saran Singh

First Respondent

District Inspector of Schools, Ballia

Non Party Participant

Committee of Management, Gandhi Inter College, Chilkahar, Ballia

Non Party Participant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment and Order Dated 18.2.1986 of the Allahabad High Court in Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 9895 of 1985

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the relevant date of substantive appointment for seniority determination under Uttar Pradesh Intermediate Education Act, 1921, s.16GG?
  2. 2 Is seniority among regularized ad hoc Lecturers determined by age when substantive appointment is from the same date?

Ratio Decidendi

Both the appellant and first respondent must be deemed substantively appointed from April 21, 1977 under s.16GG. Where substantive appointment is on the same date, seniority is determined by age, and the appellant, being older, is senior.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court judgment set aside; appellant declared senior to first respondent.

Orders

  • Appellant Sudama Singh is declared senior to Nath Saran Singh.
  • Judgment and order of the High Court in C.M.W.A. No. 9895 of 1985 set aside.