Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.19 seconds)
Ashok Kumar vs State Of Haryana & Ors on 22 September, 2015 cites

Vikas Sharma vs State Of Haryana And Others on 20 March, 2014

Whether degree of Acharya as possessed by the petitioner can be treated as equivalent to MA Sanskrit is an issue which is no longer res integra, as this issue was considered in much detail and decided against the petitioner by a judgment rendered by this Court in a bunch of petitions, the lead case in the same being CWP No.19263 of 2012 titled as Vikas Sharma vs. State of Haryana and others decided on 20.01.2014, by holding as under:-
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 12 - A G Masih - Full Document

Som Dutt vs State Of Haryana & Anr on 8 January, 2015

There is no equivalence clause mentioned therein and the qualifications are clear and specific i.e.M.A. Sanskrit with at least 50% marks. The Full Bench judgment of this Court in Som Dutt Vs. State of Haryana & another, 1983 (3) SLR 141 wherein it has been held that it is the prerogative of the employer to provide for the qualifications for appointment to the post and it can insist upon the qualifications so prescribed ANJU RANI 2015.09.24 16:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document HIGH COURT CHANDIGARH CWP No.902 of 2014 3 under the statutory rules. If no equivalence clause has been provided under the Rules and the qualifications are clear and specific, the equivalence or otherwise of the qualification possessed by a candidate cannot be taken into account. Therefore, it cannot be said that the action of the respondents in insisting upon the statutory qualification prescribed in the Rules applicable to the post in question cannot be insisted upon by the respondents. Since, Acharya is not a prescribed qualification under the statutory rules nor is there any equivalence clause, the claim of the petitioners cannot be accepted.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 17 - M M Bedi - Full Document
1