Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Chingtham Binodini Devi Vs. State of Manipur and anr.

Chingtham Binodini Devi vs State of Manipur and anr.

Type Court Judgment Court Guwahati Decided Jun 14, 2001
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/125017

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Guwahati High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
WP(C) No. 862 of 2001
Subject
;Labour and Industrial

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- - Hari Chhaya Chanu, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mrs. 2. In this writ petition, a prayer has been made by the petitioner for a direction to the respondents/ authorities concerned to allow the petitioner to enjoy the scale of pay attached to the post of regular A. 3. It is not disputed rather it...

Key legal issue
;Labour and Industrial

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Chingtham Binodini Devi

Advocate Harichhaya Chanu, Adv.

Respondent

State of Manipur and anr.

Advocate Bidyamani Devi, Adv.

Court's Analysis

Prior History

N.S. Singh, J.
1. Upon hearing Ms. Hari Chhaya Chanu, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mrs. Bidyamani Devi, learned Additional Govt. Advocate for the State respondents and also on perusal of the available material on record, I am of the view that this matter can be disposed of at this stage considering the simple nature of case and, accordingly, this writ petition is hereby disposed of with the following short order.
2. In this writ petition, a prayer has been made by the petitio

Excerpt

- - hari chhaya chanu, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as mrs. 2. in this writ petition, a prayer has been made by the petitioner for a direction to the respondents/ authorities concerned to allow the petitioner to enjoy the scale of pay attached to the post of regular a. 3. it is not disputed rather it is admitted at the bar by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as mrs......would be entitled to the payment of the salary attached to the post if the incumbent has performed the duties of that post.4. in another case, between selva raj v. lt. governor of island, port blair and ors. reported in : air 1999 sc838 , the apex court pointed out that if an employee worked on higher post though temporarily and in officiating capacity, is entitled to salary attached to the higher post.5. in view of the above position, the petitioner is entitled to get the pay and allowances attached to the post of a.i. of schools as long as she renders her services and, accordingly, i direct the respondents /authority concerned to verify the matter and, if the authority concerned found that the petitioner has been rendering her services as i/c a.i. of schools since the year 2000 under the respondents-department as mentioned above then in that case, she shall be allowed to get the salary of a regular a.i. of schools and, this shall be done within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of this order after proper adjustment of the salary so far drawn by her.6. for the reasons, observations and direction made above, this writ petition is disposed of but, no order as to costs.

Full Judgment

N.S. Singh, J.

1. Upon hearing Ms. Hari Chhaya Chanu, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mrs. Bidyamani Devi, learned Additional Govt. Advocate for the State respondents and also on perusal of the available material on record, I am of the view that this matter can be disposed of at this stage considering the simple nature of case and, accordingly, this writ petition is hereby disposed of with the following short order.

2. In this writ petition, a prayer has been made by the petitioner for a direction to the respondents/ authorities concerned to allow the petitioner to enjoy the scale of pay attached to the post of regular A.I. of Schools, who has been rendering her duties as I/C A.I. of Schools since the year 2000 vide, order dated 20.5.2000 bearing No. 3(3)/4/93-SE(S) Pt.II(A) issued by the Joint Secretary (Edn./S), Government of Manipur as in Annexure-A/3 to the writ petition by contending inter alia, that she has not been paid the pay and allowances attached to the post of A.I. of Schools without any valid reason.

3. It is not disputed rather it is admitted at the bar by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mrs. Bidyamani Devi, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate appearing for the State respondents that the present case is squarely covered up by a number of decisions/judgments passed by this Court dated 26.5.2000, 23.6.2000, 2.11.2000, 23.3.2001, 27.4.2001 in WHO No. 628/2000, WHO No. 750/2000, WHO No. 1438/2000, WP(C) No. 169/2001 and WHO No. 488/2001. Apart from that, in Judhistir Mohanty v. State of Orissa and Ors. reported in : (1997)IILLJ743SC , the Apex Court has pointed and held, thus :

It is settled position that if the Government, for want of candidate, directs an officer in the lower degree to perform the duties of the post in the higher cadre during the period, necessarily, the incumbent would be entitled to the payment of the salary attached to the post if the incumbent has performed the duties of that post.

4. In another case, between Selva Raj v. Lt. Governor of Island, Port Blair and Ors. reported in : AIR 1999 SC838 , the Apex Court pointed out that if an employee worked on higher post though temporarily and in officiating capacity, is entitled to salary attached to the higher post.

5. In view of the above position, the petitioner is entitled to get the pay and allowances attached to the post of A.I. of schools as long as she renders her services and, accordingly, I direct the respondents /authority concerned to verify the matter and, if the authority concerned found that the petitioner has been rendering her services as I/C A.I. of Schools since the year 2000 under the respondents-Department as mentioned above then in that case, she shall be allowed to get the salary of a regular A.I. of Schools and, this shall be done within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of this order after proper adjustment of the salary so far drawn by her.

6. For the reasons, observations and direction made above, this writ petition is disposed of but, no order as to costs.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial