Court : Allahabad Lucknow
Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, C.J. The present reference to the Full Bench was made by a learned Single Judge of this Court on 20 December 2006; the issue referred for adjudication being as follows: "Which date will be relevant for the purpose of determination of criteria of availability and eligibility for promotion to the post of Lecturer grade i.e. the date on which vacancy occurs to forward to the Selection Committee/Commission or the first day of year of the recruitment when the vacancy is notified for recruitment?" The Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education (Services Selection Board) Act, 1982 established a Board for the selection of teachers in institutions recognised under the Intermediate Education Act, 1921. The Statement of Objects and Reasons appended to the introduction of the Bill in the State Legislature furnished the following rationale for the constitution of a statutory Board: "The appointment of teachers in secondary institutions recognised by the Board of High School and Interme...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.3945 OF2018(ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) NO.35786 OF2016 SISTERS OF ST. JOSEPH OF CLUNY APPELLANT VERSUS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS CIVIL APPEAL No.3946 OF2018(ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) NO.34894 OF2016 NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR MINORITY EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS APPELLANT VERSUS BAISAKHI BANERJEE & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS CIVIL APPEAL No.3947 OF2018(ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) NO.34900 OF2016 NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR MINORITY EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS APPELLANT VERSUS MILLI AL-AMEEN COLLEGE & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS1CIVIL APPEAL No.3948 OF2018(ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) NO.35026 OF2016 NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR MINORITY EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS APPELLANT VERSUS PRAVEEN KAUR MAROLIA & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS CIVIL APPEAL No.3949 OF2018(ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) NO.34933 OF2016 NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR MINORITY EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS APPELLANT VERSUS DR. ZARINA KHATOON & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS CIVIL APPEAL No.3950 OF2018(ARI...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE FRIDAY,THE19H DAY OF DECEMBER201428TH AGRAHAYANA, 1936 WP(C).No. 2609 of 2014 (A) --------------------------- PETITIONER : ------------------- ROSHAN THOMAS, U.P.S.A., S.H.H.S.,MYLAPRA, PATHANAMTHITTA, RESIDING AT KUTHANETHU HOUSE, PAYYANAMON P.O., KONNY. BY ADV. SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEW RESPONDENTS : ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, KERALA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.2. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, JAGATHY, THIRUVANTHAPURAM - 695 001.3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, PATHANAMTHITTA AT THIRUVALLA.4. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PATHANAMTHITTA.5. ASSISTANT EDUCATRIONAL OFFICER, PATHANAMTHITTA.6. MANAGER,MSC SCHOOLS, PATHANAMTHITTA - 689 645. R1 TO R5 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. LOUSY A. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON1912-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: bp WP...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
NLRB v. Catholic Bishop of Chicago - 440 U.S. 490 (1979) U.S. Supreme Court NLRB v. Catholic Bishop of Chicago, 440 U.S. 490 (1979) National Labor Relations Board v. Catholic Bishop of Chicago No. 77-752 Argued October 30, 1978 Decided March 21, 1979 440 U.S. 490 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT Syllabus The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) certified unions as bargaining agents for lay teachers in schools operated by respondents, which refused to recognize or bargain with the unions; the NLRB issued cease-and-desist orders against respondents, holding that it had properly assumed jurisdiction over the schools. Exercise of jurisdiction was asserted to be in line with its policy of declining jurisdiction only when schools are "completely religious" not just "religiously associated," as it found to be the case here, because the schools taught secular as well as religious subjects. On respondents' challenges to the NLRB orders, the C...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1967Kant93; AIR1967Mys93
Kalagate, J.1. The petitioner, a teacher in the Canara High School, Urva, Mangalore, challenges the order of the second respondent, dated 26th October, 1962 and also the order of the third respondent, dated 15th November 1962, in the following circumstances:2. The petitioner was employed as a teacher by the third respondent on certain terms which are embodied in the agreement, Ext. A, dated 5th December 1952, entered into between them. While she (petitioner) was thus working as a teacher, an incident took place on 5th December 1961. According to the third respondent, the Headmaster asked her to go to VIII Standard B for substitution work for the first period but she did not go there and also refused to sign what is called the 'book of substitution work'. The Headmaster, therefore, asked her to explain her conduct within 24 hours why the matter should not be reported to the Manager for disciplinary action. The petitioner, it appears, did not comply with the requirement of the Headmaster...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2000(1)ALD434
ORDER1. The petitioner is a postgraduate and a graduate in Education (B.Ed). The petitioner was appointed as Head Master by the 3rd respondent school on 2-6-1995. He was placed on probation. The appointment was for a period of one year from 3-6-1995. It can be extended further after the end of academic year. As per the appointment order, the petitioner is liable for termination if his work is not found to be upto the expected level during the periodof probation. The appointment order also says that the petitioner shall also be in charge of Principal of the Junior College, which is expected to be commenced in the academicyear.2. On 9-4-1996, the Managing Committee served a communication informing the petitioner that his services are terminated with effect from 30-4-1996. The petitioner challenged this by filing WP No. 9169 of 1996. At the interlocutory stage, this Court suspended the order of termination on 24-6-1996. Be that as it may, on 20-9-1996, this Court disposed of the writ peti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1989AP96
ORDER1. This bunch of cases gives birth to constitutional questions of far-reaching consequences entwined with contempt for disobedience to writs of Mandamus issued by this Court.2. The indisputable facts are: that preceding the Andhra Pradesh Education Act (Act 1 of 1982), the Grant-in-Aid Code (Executive Instructions) was in vogue; the Government prescribed the procedure to establish private educational institutions; conditions for recognition and of the eligibility to grant-in-aid. Those conditions have been statutorised under Section 21 thereof. On their fulfilment the educational institutions become eligible for admission to grant-in-aid. G.O. Ms. No. 725, Education dt. July 7, 1977 directed to admit all the institutions started prior to April 4, 1977 to grant-in-aid in a phased manner between 1977 and 1980. The Government, in G.O. Ms. No. 238, Education dt. May 27, 1986 issued orders directing that the schools started on or after April 1, 1977 and were continuing as on Sept. 1, 1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1979All209
K.N. Singh, J. 1. A Division Bench of this Court, expressing doubt about the correctness of the principles laid down by another Bench of this Court in Pra-bhat Kumar v. Board of High School and Intermediate Education (1971 All LJ 1391) referred the writ petition for decision to a larger Bench. Since the entire case has been referred to this Bench, it is essential to state necessary facts giving rise to this petition.2. The petitioner appeared at the Intermediate Examination of 1973 held by the Board of High School and Intermediate Education (hereinafter referred to as the Board) from the Government Inter College, Banda. A complaint was recieved by the Board that unfair means was used by the examinees at large scales at the said centre in answering the question papers of Intermediate Examination of 1973. The Board appointed a Screening Committee of experts in various subjects to ascertain the correctness of the allegations. The Screening Committee on scrutiny of the answer books found t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1998(1)AWC377
Sudhir Naraln, J.1. The common questions of law and facts are Involved In both these petitions. They are being disposed of jointly. The reference to the petitioner and the respondents shall be taken from Writ Petition No. 4134 of 1997.2. The dispute relates to the promotion to the post of Lecturer in Majldia Islamla Inter College. Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as the Institution). Ikramul Haq, petitioner and Mohammad Sabir, respondent No. 3 both are functioning as Assistant Teachers in L.T, grade in the Institution. One Mohammad Khalid was permanent lecturer in the Institution. He retired on 30th June, 1996, on attaining the age of superannuation and on his retirement, the post of lecturer fell vacant. The petitioner and respondent No. 3 both claimed promotion to the post of lecturer. The petitioner is admittedly senior to respondent No. 3. The dispute was that the petitioner was not eligible and qualified for appointment to the post of lecturer in Urdu and Persian on the date the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1966All477
Jagdish Sahai, J. 1. The following question has been referred to us by the Division Bench hearing Special Appeal No. 682 of 1964 which is directed against the judgment of S. N. Ivedi, J., dated 20-8-1964 dismissing Writ Petition No. 5718 of 1968 filed by the appoint Gajadhar Prasad (hereinafter referred to as the appellant):'Whether the Vice-Chancellor of the Allahabad University is required to perform quasi Judicial functions in inflicting punishments uponstudents for breach of discipline ?' 2. By means of an order, dated 2-12-1963 the Vice-Chancellor of the Allahabad University (Dr. Balbhadra Prasad) expelled the appellant from the University with immediate effect' ana ordered that he be not admitted to any class or examination of the University in future. One of the submissions made before the Division Bench was that the appellant had not been heard before the order mentioned above was passed against him. It is under these circumstances that the question arose whether the Vice-Chanc...
Tag this Judgment!