Employment Rights - The Legal Chamber

Supreme Court: FR 56(a) Means You’re in Service Till Month-End, Entitled to All Benefits

2Mar

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court: FR 56(a) Means You’re in Service Till Month-End, Entitled to All Benefits

The Supreme Court held that employees retiring on March 31st due to FR 56(a) are deemed "in service" on that date, entitling them to pay revisions effective from that day. Relying on Rule 5(2) of CCS (Pension) Rules and a three-Judge Bench precedent, the Court clarified that such retirement dates are working days for salary purposes, not mere formalities. Facts Of The Case: The appellants were employees of the Assam Power Generation Corporation Ltd. who both attained the age of superannuation (60 years) during the month of March 2016. By virtue of Fundamental Rule 56(a), which provides that every government servant shall retire on the afternoon of the last day of the month in which they attain the age of sixty years, their date of retirement was extended to March 31, 2016. Subsequently, ...

Supreme Court Orders Assam to Provincialise Services of Music Teachers

The Supreme Court held that the appellants' right to provincialisation had crystallised under the 2011 Act. Despite favourable findings, the High Court erred in not granting mandamus relief. The Court modified the impugned judgment, ruling that a Writ Court has inherent power under Article 226 to mould relief and grant consequential mandamus to remedy injustice, which it duly issued. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from a batch of appeals before the Supreme Court, filed by a large group of Music Teachers employed in various provincialised schools in Assam. Their grievance stemmed from the State of Assam's failure to formally provincialise their services under the Assam Venture Educational Institutions (Provincialisation of Services) Act, 2011. The appellants' eligibility had been ...

Supreme Court: No Absorption for Waitlisted Candidate After Recruitment Process Ends

The Supreme Court held that a candidate in the reserved panel (waitlist) has no vested right to appointment once the selected candidates join their posts. A legal concession made before a tribunal cannot bind the authorities if it contravenes statutory recruitment rules or extends the life of a waitlist indefinitely. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from a 1997 recruitment drive by All India Radio, Eastern Zone, for three Technician posts reserved for Scheduled Castes. The respondent, Subit Kumar Das, was placed at Serial No. 1 in the Reserved Panel (waitlist). All three selected candidates joined their posts, so the waitlist was not operated. In 1999, during litigation before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), the appellants (Union of India) gave a statement that the r...