Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.21 seconds)
Documents citing Pradeep Kumar Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors. on 3 July, 2008

Nayan Mandal vs State Of Jharkhand on 20 August, 2009

Petitioner was examined by the medical board and came to conclusion that the petitioner was aged about 19 years and half and below 20 years on 23.10.2007. It is relevant to note that as per the rule itself, if certain date of birth is not available, then the next thing is to rely for date of birth is from the first school, attended by a child. In this case, the register produced by the witness No.3 was not a complete register and the court has rightly left the oral evidence and relied on the medical evidence. Moreover, the petitioner has relied in a rule reported in 2008, eastern India Criminal Cases, page 253 and on a policy decision in the case of Pradeep Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand, reported in 2002, Eastern India Criminal Cases, page 244, it was held as under-
Jharkhand High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 1 - P Kumar - Full Document

Muriel Kumar vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors. on 10 December, 2012

3. The Mission Primary School, Gomoh is a Minority Institution, as per the case of the parties and the State has given this status in the year 1980. The petitioner participated in an exercise for appointment of Headmistress of the said school on the basis of an advertisement contained at annexure-2 dated 23rd January 2002. The terms of the advertisement disclosed that applications were invited from the eligible candidates by the Secretary of the school for the post of Headmistress of the said school, as per the eligibility conditions laid down therein. It is the case of the petitioner that she was selected in an exercise in which the Managing Committee of the school was involved and thereafter, a recommendation was made vide annexure-6 by the Managing Committee to the District Superintendent of Education, Dhanbad to grant approval of her appointment as Headmistress of the school. However, respondents have returned the recommendation vide Annexure-H to the counter affidavit. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent State official was bound to grant approval of the recommendation of her appointment as she had been appointed on the basis of an advertisement issued by the Minority School in question after following the entire procedure and further, there is no irregularity in the same. Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a judgment of this court passed by the learned Single Judge in the case of Pradeep Kumar Singh vs. The State of Jharkhand & others [2008(3) JLJR 352]. It is submitted that in that case also, this court treating the lacuna in appointment process and finding some irregularity, remanded the matter before the respondent authority to reconsider the same.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - A K Singh - Full Document
1