Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging Order Denying Salary Grant for Teacher. Court Holds That Approval of Appointment Entities Management to Grant-in-Aid Reimbursement.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR In Favour of Accused
  • 8
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners, Vikas Shikshan Sanshtha and Adiwasi Post Basic Ashram School, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 03.06.2014 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development Department, Nagpur. The order directed the petitioners to pay the salary of respondent No.4, Shri Narendrakumar Kokude, for the period from 28.09.2002 to 16.12.2005, and refused grant-in-aid facility. The undisputed facts were that for the period from 28.09.1998 to 31.04.1999, two teachers, Shri Badwaik and Shri Kokude, worked on the same post admissible for salary grant. The management paid Shri Badwaik's salary from its own funds for a later period. The approval to Shri Kokude's appointment was granted on 21.04.2008 for the period from 28.09.2002 to 16.12.2005. The court noted that the entitlement to grant-in-aid was not in dispute and that there was no case of double payment from the state exchequer. The court allowed the petition, quashed the impugned order, and directed respondent No.3 to release the salary of respondent No.4 for the said period within one month of completion of all other requirements.

Headnote

A) Service Law - Grant-in-Aid - Entitlement to Reimbursement - Approval of Appointment - Where the appointment of a teacher was approved by the authorities, the management is entitled to grant-in-aid for reimbursement of salary for the approved period, unless it results in double payment from the state exchequer. - Held that the order denying grant-in-aid was quashed and respondents directed to release salary (Paras 4-5).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioners are entitled to grant-in-aid for salary of a teacher whose appointment was approved by the respondents.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Writ petition allowed. Order dated 03.06.2014 quashed and set aside. Respondent No.3 directed to release salary of respondent No.4 for period 28.09.2002 to 16.12.2005 within one month of completion of all other requirements.

Law Points

  • Grant-in-aid entitlement
  • Approval of appointment
  • Reimbursement of salary
  • No double payment from state exchequer
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2017 LawText (BOM) (03) 150

Writ Petition No. 664 of 2015

2017-03-29

R. K. Deshpande

Shri P.B.Patil for Petitioners, Shri K.L.Dharmadhikari for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3, Shri I.N.Choudhari for Respondent No. 4

Vikas Shikshan Sanshtha and Adiwasi Post Basic Ashram School

State of Maharashtra, Upper Commissioner Tribal Development, Project Officer Integrated Tribal Development Project, and Shri Narendrakumar Kokude

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging an order directing payment of salary and refusing grant-in-aid.

Remedy Sought

Quashing of order dated 03.06.2014 and direction to release grant-in-aid for salary of respondent No.4.

Filing Reason

The Additional Commissioner directed petitioners to pay salary of a teacher and refused grant-in-aid facility.

Previous Decisions

Order dated 03.06.2014 by Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development Department, Nagpur.

Issues

Whether the petitioners are entitled to grant-in-aid for salary of a teacher whose appointment was approved by the respondents.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners argued that approval of appointment entitles them to grant-in-aid. Respondents refused grant-in-aid despite approval.

Ratio Decidendi

Where the appointment of a teacher is approved by the authorities, the management is entitled to grant-in-aid for reimbursement of salary for the approved period, unless it results in double payment from the state exchequer.

Judgment Excerpts

Undisputedly, the approval to the appointment of Shri Kokude was granted on 21.04.2008 for the period from 28.09.2002 to 16.12.2005. In view of this, there was no reason for the respondents not to extend the grant in aid facility for reimbursement of salary of Shri Kokude for the said period.

Procedural History

Notice for final disposal issued. Respondents filed reply. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Revision Petition in Rash Driving Death Case — Conviction Under Section 304A IPC Upheld. Evidence of Eye-Witnesses and Medical Reports Establish Negligence Beyond Reasonable Doubt.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging Order Denying Salary Grant for Teacher. Court Holds That Approval of Appointment Entities Management to Grant-in-Aid Reimbursement.