PUSHPA GUPTA Vs. STATE & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has challenged the order of the respondents dated 23.4.05 by which she was disallowed joining in service pursuant to her selection and appointment on the post of Teacher Grade-III vide order dated 2.4.2005.

(2.) Shri B.B.L. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though the petitioner has subsequently been allowed to join duties on 28.4.2005, but the respondents are treating her appointment as a fresh appointment made on 28.4.05. They neither treating her appointment having been made pursuant to the original order, nor are they paying to her the salary for the intervening period. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the judgement in the case of Smt. Manju Menaria v. State & Ors., 2005 4 SCT 104, in which the division bench held such action of the respondents as bad in law and directed payment of back wages for the intervening period.

(3.) Shri Aklesh Jain, learned Deputy Government Counsel opposed the writ petition and submitted that at the time of her joining, the petitioner was having pregnancy of three months, therefore, she could not be allowed to join the services.