citedby: 92845914

1 - 3 of 3 (0.25 seconds)

18. It is trite that once the individual participates in a particular selection process, post issuance of advertisement, is found unsuccessful, would be precluded from challenging the process of advertisement as noted in the judgment of the Supreme Court in Ramesh Chandra Shah vs. Anil Joshi reported in (2013) 11 SCC 309, Vijendra Kumar Verma vs. Public Service Commission, Uttrakhand & Ors. reported in (2011) 1 SCC 150, Madras Institute of Development Studies & Anr. vs. K. Sivasubramaniyan & Ors. reported in (2016) 1 SCC 454 and recently reiterated by learned Division Bench of this Court in Karan Singh Meena vs. Registrar General, Delhi High Court & Anr. reported in 2022 SCC OnLine Del 3098, duly followed and relied upon in the judgment dated 23.01.2024 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) 677/2024 titled Ankita Meena vs. Airport Authority of India and Anr.

Delhi High Court - Orders Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - T R Gedela - Full Document

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/09/2025 at 22:06:26 Kumar Verma vs. Public Service Commission, Uttrakhand & Ors. reported in (2011) 1 SCC 150, Madras Institute of Development Studies & Anr. vs. K. Sivasubramaniyan & Ors. reported in (2016) 1 SCC 454 and recently reiterated by learned Division Bench of this Court in Karan Singh Meena vs. Registrar General, Delhi High Court & Anr. reported in 2022 SCC OnLine Del 3098"

Delhi High Court - Orders Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - P Jalan - Full Document

26. It is further contended that the Petitioner is estopped from challenging the recruitment procedure after participation, and reliance is placed on decisions including Ashok Kumar v. State of Bihar9 and Karan Singh Meena v. Registrar General, Delhi High Court10 to submit that a candidate cannot approbate and reprobate.

Delhi High Court - Orders Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - S Narula - Full Document

Search Results Page