Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 15 (0.22 seconds)
Page No.# 1/27 vs The State Of Assam And 7 Ors on 10 December, 2025 cites

Purnendu Sekhar Debnath vs The State Of Assam And 7 Ors on 13 February, 2019

10.1. Mr. Sen has also repeated the argument that the respondent authorities did not deny the averment made in the petition and that the Director had failed to comply with the order of this Court and the respondent No. 8 had obtained off-campus degree and in view of the decision of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, in WP(C) No. 2983/2017 (Purnendu Sekhar Debnath Vs. State of Assam), her Ph.D. degree and MA degree are also invalid and under such circumstances, it is contended to allow this petition, by setting aside the impugned order and by directing the respondent No. 2, to appoint the petitioner in the post of Assistant Professor of Bengali under PwD category.
Gauhati High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 1 - S K Medhi - Full Document

Kedar Nath Agrawal (Dead) & Anr vs Dhanraji Devi (Dead) By Lrs. & Anr on 13 October, 2004

5.2 It is also stated that the petitioner had passed the National Eligibility Test (NET) on 18.01.2024, and the same was a subsequent event, and in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kedar Nath Agarwal Vs. Dhanraji Devi, reported in (2004) 8 SCC 76, the respondent No. 2 ought to have considered the subsequent event; and that the respondent No. 8 has obtained her M.A. degree as 'off-campus candidate' by distance mode of learning and such a degree is not valid for being appointed to the post of college and school teachers, as per the Judgment and Order, dated 13.02.2019, passed in WP(C) No. 2983/2017 (Purnendu Sekhar Debnath Vs. State of Assam) and in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Prof. Yashpal & Another Vs. State of Chattishgarh & Ors., reported in (2005) 5 SCC 420; and that, the respondent No. 8 is over-aged and her Page No.# 12/27 academic record is also not satisfactory; and the impugned order, dated 02.11.2024, passed by the respondent No. 2; is cryptic and the Director has failed to take note of the aforementioned facts and circumstances and has failed to pass a reasoned order. Under such circumstances, it is contended by the petitioner to allow this petition.
Supreme Court of India Cites 15 - Cited by 117 - Full Document

Puran Singh & Ors vs State Of Punjab on 25 April, 1975

7.3 However, Mr. Dhar submits that the Director, before passing the impugned order, dated 02.11.2024, ought to have consulted with the Expert Committee and also the UGC, to ascertain as to whether the subject of thesis of the respondent No. 8 is on the subject of Bengali or not; and that, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Puran Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab, reported in (1996) 2 SCC 205, the provisions in CPC are also applicable in writ proceeding. Under such circumstances, Mr. Dhar has contended to set aside the impugned order, dated 02.11.2024, and to direct the respondent No. 2, to appoint the petitioner as the Assistant Professor in Bengali language.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 310 - S M Ali - Full Document

Pasupuleti Venkateswarlu vs The Motor & General Traders on 18 March, 1975

In view of the aforementioned legal matrix, this Court afraid, the submission, so advanced by Mr. Sen, learned counsel for the petitioner, that subsequent events has to be taken into consideration, would not advance his case and the decision referred to by him in Lekh Raj (supra), and in Pasupuleti Venkateswarlu (supra) would not come into his assistance.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 472 - V R Iyer - Full Document

N.T. Bevin Kath Etc vs Karnataka Public Service Commission ... on 30 March, 1990

And in the case of N.T. Devin Katti(supra) Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that a candidate does not acquire any vested right of selection, but, if he is eligible and is otherwise qualified in accordance with the relevant rules and the terms contained in the advertisement, he does acquire a vested right of being considered for selection is accordance with the rules as they existed on the date of advertisement. But, the petitioner herein had failed to fulfill the requisite Page No.# 26/27 criteria of having Ph.D. degree on the concerned subject and she had acquired the qualification of NET/SLET, subsequent to the last of date of application, as fixed in the advertisement. Those decisions would have advanced her case if would have been otherwise qualified in accordance with the relevant rules and the terms contained in the advertisement.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 313 - K N Singh - Full Document

Purushottam vs Chairman, M.S.E.B. And Anr. on 11 May, 1999

In that view of the matter the decision referred by Mr. Sen in the case of Purushottam (supra) would also not come into assistance of the petitioner. The petitioner has no right to be appointed since she had failed to fulfill the required criteria for applying the post on the last date fixed for receiving the application in the advertisement. If the petitioner had failed to satisfy the requisite criteria, so laid down in the advertisement and as per the guidelines issued by the respondent authority, merely because some of the averments in her petition are not controverted and that the private respondent had not contested the petition, would not mandate acceptance her case while she has not even fulfilled the requisite criteria in the advertisement.
Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 60 - U C Banerjee - Full Document
1   2 Next