Supreme Court of India
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, FINANCE AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND ORS. versus P. ESWAR REDDY AND ORS.
- Decided
- 8 January 1996
- Judges listed
- K. RAMASWAMY, G.B. PATTANAIK
Citations
- Official
- [1996] 1 S.C.R. 207 · 1996 INSC 30
Cited by
We found no other Supreme Court judgment we hold that cites this one.
Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.
The Court's text
Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. The Court did not number this judgment's paragraphs, so they are listed by page. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.
Office report dated January 5, 1996 shows that respondent Nos. 1-83, 86- 88, 90 and 93 to 95 have been served. They are not appearing either in person or through counsel. But though notice on respondent Nos. 84, 85, 89, 92 and 96-105 was sent, their acknowledgements have not been received nor any report in that behalf has been sent. Notice must be deemed to have been served on all the respondents.
p. 207, margin E
Leave granted.
p. 207, margin G
In G.0.M.S. No. 105 dated April 3, 1974 of the Finance & Planning (FR.I. & L) Department, it is stated that the orders issued in 0.0.M.S. No. 1059 dated November Jl, 1971 directing sanction of a maximum compensatory allowance@ Rs. 150 [which was later increased to Rs. 200] to the officers from who1n residential attenders withdrawn are to enable such officers to employ a person/persons to attend to the needs of the officers in the discharge of official work at his residence. It was subsequently extended to the Senior and Junior Lecturers working in the colleges. We are concerned with the Junior Lecturers.
pp. 207–208, margin G
The question arose whether. junior lecturers during holidays and leave period are entitled to the payment of compensatory allowance. There was difference of opinion among the two-member Bench of the Tribunal and consequently the matter was placed before a third member. Per majority, it was held that they are entitled to the payment of the allowance during the leave or vacation period. It would be seen that the Lecturers would not perform any official duty during holidays. If at all they have performed duty they would evaluate the examination papers for which they would be paid the· amount for evaluating the papers. Under these circumstances, the majority members were not right in concluding that they arc discharging the official duties during the vacation or leave period and they are entitled to the compensatory allowance. The said decision of the tribunal is accordingly set aside. The appeals are accordingly allowed. No costs. G.N. Appeals allowed.
p. 208, margin A