Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (0.44 seconds)
Documents citing Rakesh Kumar Sharma And Anr vs State (Panchayati Raj Dep)Ors on 11 May, 2012

Sagarmal Son Of Teja Ram vs State Of Rajasthan on 22 January, 2025

12.1 That the principle of parity and judicial discipline, was also not considered/granted by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of co-accused Rakesh Kumar (supra) (Annexure - 4). 12.2 The criminal antecedents, qua the appellants, were not brought on record and hence were not considered. 12.3 That the Hon'ble Supreme Court had observed that the order passed by the High Court, was passed in appeal, whereas at Page - 53 (Annexure-5), reflects that orders were passed while exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and Section 482 Cr.P.C. after a detailed reason and not under the bail proceedings.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - S Jain - Full Document

Ravi Shankar Sharma vs State (Education Department) Anr on 2 February, 2017

5. Counsel for the appellant/petitioner has mainly contended that it was not his fault to get admission in an institution which was recognised at the relevant time but subsequently, it was found that on the basis of fraudulent NOC which was secured from the State Government it was recognised, therefore, it is the fault of institution and he should not suffer. He has relied upon the decision of this Court at Principal seat at Jodhpur in the case of Rakesh Kumar vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. in SB Civil Writ Petition No.3868/2001, decided on 22.12.2006 and the decision of Division Bench in the case of State of Rajasthan & Ors. vs. Jabra Ram 2005(1) WLC (Raj.) 637 wherein in para 17 & 18 the division bench has observed as under:
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Premeswar Thakuria vs The State Of Assam And 2 Ors on 2 June, 2015

He has also placed reliance on a decision of the Apex Court in the case of Rakesh Kumar Sharma vs. State & Ors reported in (2013) 11 SCC 58 to contend that eligibility has to be reckoned on the date of selection. At the time of selection, Md. Nurul Islam was not eligible. Subsequently, at the time of Sri Premeswar Thakuria being named the in-charge Head Master of the school, Md. Nurul Islam was still not eligible. Therefore, the claim of Md. Nurul Islam is untenable and cannot be accepted.
Gauhati High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - U Bhuyan - Full Document

Ajay Kumar Meena S/O Sh. Jagmal Meena vs State Of Rajasthan on 16 April, 2019

Before proceeding further with this petition, I would require I.G. (Recruitment), Rajasthan in the context of the observation of the Apex Court in the case of Ashok Kumar Yadav vs. State of Haryana (supra) and judgment of this Court in Rakesh Kumar (supra) to reconsider the case of the petitioner for appointment as Constable with reference to its overall facts particularly that it may be rather harsh and unjust to deny the petitioner, already selected as a Constable, appointment as Constable on the ground of his failing to disclose the factum of his earlier involvement in a criminal case in which was he tried as a juvenile but acquitted honorably vide order dated 24.8.2011. The IG (Recruitment) should also consider how in the overall facts to Rule 13 of the Rajasthan Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1989 sits with the denial of appointment to the petitioner.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - A Sharma - Full Document

Suresh Kumar Prajapati vs State Of Raj And Ors on 28 April, 2017

(3 of 3) [CW-8390/2014] Taking into account the fact that the father of the petitioner died a decade ago, along with the observations made by the Co- ordinate Bench in the case of Rakesh Kumar (supra), no ground is made out to issue any direction in favour of the petitioner, especially when the Unit itself has closed, in pursuance of the decision taken by the State Cabinet.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 Next