KAMLESH GOPAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner who was an employee of respondent no.4/School seeks the following reliefs:-

(2.) At the outset, it is required to be noted that the principle of limitation governs a writ petition and this Court cannot grant monetary emoluments which were due 3 years before filing of the writ petition. This is held by the Supreme Court in the judgment in the case of State of Orissa and Another Vs. Mamta Mohanty, 2011 3 SCC 436, the relevant paragraphs of this judgment are para nos. 52 to 54 and which read as under:-

(3.) In addition to the aforesaid aspect of limitation, it is necessary to note that the petitioner claims to have been appointed with respondent no.4/School from 5.7.1973 but petitioner has not substantiated the same by filing any document with the writ petition showing her employment from 1973. Respondent no.4 was admittedly taken over by respondent no.5/Khosla Education Foundation and petitioner was treated as a regular T.G.T from the year 1978 and from when all her dues as claimed have more or less been paid subject to what is hereafter said. It is also noted that the petitioner acquired qualifications of B.Ed only in the year 1978 and therefore she thus only could be appointed as a T.G.T thereafter as B.Ed qualification was required for appointment of the T.G.T and hence petitioner cannot claim employment as a teacher from the year 1973 as claimed by her.