In a recent landmark judgement by the Supreme Court of India, a significant decision was made in the case of Shukla v. District Inspector of Schools. The court has directed the appellant to pay the first respondent an amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- as compensation. This ruling marks a crucial moment in the legal battle between the parties involved. Stay tuned for more updates on this case!
Facts
- Ali Hussain Ansari was recommended for appointment as Assistant Teacher on ad hoc basis in Satya Prakash Vivekanand Inter College, Musahari, Deoria, Uttar Pradesh.
- The Division Bench affirmed the finding of continuation of service from the initial date of appointment as 08.06.1987.
- The period between 8.6.1987 till the actual joining date of 30.06.2006 was directed to be counted for consequential benefits, excluding payment of back wages.
- The judgement regarding post-retirement benefits needed modification based on the peculiar facts and balance of equities.
- Shesh Mani Shukla preferred Writ Petition No 11131 of 2010 seeking consequential benefits including pension benefits from 08.06.1987
- The District Inspector of Schools, Deoria initially declined approval citing violation of certain orders and later refused financial approval for Shukla’s appointment
- Shukla filed Writ Petition No 14530/1988 challenging the Inspector’s orders and was granted interim relief for payment of salary till April 2004
- Despite working and receiving salary as per interim directions, Shukla’s Writ Petition was eventually dismissed in 2004
- A Special Appeal filed by Shukla was also dismissed in 2006 based on the High Court’s interim directions
- Shukla retired in 2009, having joined as Assistant Professor in 2006 after a long legal battle for appointment
- The District Inspector rejected Shukla’s representation for arrears of salary citing ‘no work no pay’ principle
- Shukla was recommended for a post in 1987 but faced delays and challenges in being appointed until 2006
- Shukla’s appointment as Assistant Professor was finally approved in 2006 and worked until retirement in 2009
Also Read: Judgment in the Case of Sundew Properties Ltd. v. TSERC & APTEL
Decision
- The appellant is directed to pay the first respondent an amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- as compensation.
- This compensation is in addition to any other benefits payable to the first respondent with the date of appointment as 30.06.2006.
- The payment of Rs. 4,00,000/- must be made within six weeks from the date of this order.
- If there is a delay in payment, the appellant will be liable to pay interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of this order.
Also Read: High Court Judgment on Renewal of Mining Leases: State of Odisha vs. Thakurani Global Processors
Case Title: THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Vs. ALI HUSSAIN ANSARI (2020 INSC 41)
Case Number: C.A. No.-000314-000314 / 2020
